Lots of writers were saying there were no real challengers post-Spinks. That's a credit to Tyson, and what most writers say about the heavyweight division at any point in time. I don't know, but I remember a RING magazine article where they say something to the effect of, "There's no point asking how Tyson rates against the greats like Ali and Louis. Let's wait 10 years and then rate him" ..... which seems reasonable thing to say about a kid that's only just turned 22 ! I'm sure that was a common feeling. You don't just go rating a current active fighter who is so young and has a whole career ahead of him against the all-time greats whose careers have played out and can be looked back on in perspective.
Oh, so Ali gets the credit for beating Liston. But the credit for beating Tyson goes to Mike Tyson. :-(
There are tons of books and interviews by people who worked with Tyson that tell the same tale. Rooney was a disciplinarian. He wanted Tyson in Catskill training under curfews without distraction. Rooney was a no bull**** kind of guy and you only need to talk to him for about 30 seconds to know it. Snowell often stated that if Tyson didnt want to run or spar he didnt do it. He started calling all the shots. In the Tyson Douglas documentary Snowell even told Tyson he was headed for an ass kicking. Thats why he never went back to Rooney because he didnt want to make those type of sacrifices. Tyson to this day will say he didnt do anything differently and wasnt prepared for a lot of fights under Rooney but thats all bull****. Ive asked Kevin personally about that and he said no never, Tyson was always in good shape for his fights and he had him sparring most times the same week of the fight.
Tyson's destruction of Berbick is my favourite Tyson fight/performance. It's just pure destruction, or something that I can't quite describe. And both fighters went in to that fight with something to prove. There's not even a word for what Tyson did to Berbick. Tyson may have been even better against Tony Tubbs, another clinical destruction, but I don't know if I even rate Tubbs. & the Holmes KO. The big right hand that scored the first KD was just out of this world. The final right hand where Holmes is tangled in the ropes was one of those iconic brutal and scary moments in heavyweight boxing - like the 37 year old Joe Louis getting smashed through the ropes by Marciano.
What's funny about that? Liston came up against arguably the greatest of all time and lost - Tyson came up against a 42-1 underdog and a much lesser fighter than he had already beaten.
But that's just pre-conceived notions. It's bias. What's the point in fighting anyone then ? You can just say, "oh, i beat guys who ON PAPER are as good as you, so you simply cannot beat me ... and if you do then i must have beat myself !" Ali was a masive underdog and NOT rated as the greatest of all-time against Liston. ON PAPER, looking at their records and watching their recent form, Cassius Clay cannot beat Sonny Liston in 1964 either ! Liston was similarly over-confident and under-prepared against Clay as Tyson was against Douglas. Still, give Clay/Ali all the credit because he went on to this and that, and fight in Zaire and Manila 10 years later ! But Douglas isn't allowed any credit because he didn't go on to have the career Ali had ?
Why not? He was what 34-0 and had fought 7 current or former champions as well as the linear titleist who twice defeated Holmes, (regardless they were close fights with a top great). He had accomplished a lot in a short period of time and the substance of his record was comparable, regardless of his age. People started talking about Holyfield as a great when he had only 24 fights so I dont think there is any standard of time that has to be associated with a fighter being called great if the substance is there. What truly separates those top 5 guys is when they face another guy on their level and thats when I think a guy really proves his place in the ATG rankings and thats why guys like Holyfield and Tyson and even Lewis are closer to the bottom half of the top ten in my opinion.
A lot of people prefer not to rank active champions, especially young ones who might have many more years left at the top, alongside the established greats. Probably because they might then have to keep ad******g that fighter up a notch, or maybe down. And also because it's easier to get a perspective on the relative value of a fighter with distance of time. Or i don't know why. But that's what a lot of people who make these lists do.
He was, certainly, in that he was being called the potential greatest ever. Douglas showed us all that, great and excellent as he was, he was no Ali or Louis.
Good picks. Love the Tubbs fight as well, although the utter silence of the japanese crowd gives off a strange vibe.
GOAT Ali was a couple of h2h classes above Tinkerbell Tyson,, ALWAYS i could see this on film even back in 1986/1987/1988/1989. His FRUSTRATION on footage i could see plain as day in ALL his best years And he was way EASIER TO TAG And stun, then Ali of 1964/1965/1966/1967. :bbb BUT Joey Louis?! PLEASE show me some fights where he is NOT fighting a crude CAVEMAN bum AND looks mint on film, since i have NEVER been impressed with Louis, not once, not ever. :bart Foreman Hooooooooooooooooooooooooook!:smoke
The more I think about his career, the more I conclude he has to be a top ten lock. If he'd have never returned from prison he'd still be a top fifteen lock with his 4 year reign, complete unification and 9 defences. Add to that his return to the championship in 96 a full decade after his first championship victory combined with his shot victory over golota which led to him being the top ranked contender again a full 15 years after winning his first championship and you have the ingredients for a top ten lock certainly. I can't see a valid argument ranking rocky, sonny or dempsey above him. He was more dominant than all, reigned just as long, has a comparable resume and looks better on film than all but sonny.