Mike Tyson ranks higher than Joe Frazier

When rating Mike Tyson it's awful hard to get past the Douglas and Holyfield debacles. It just is.

 

Head to head I think Tyson could beat Joe, It's styles ,but historically Frazier is the better fighter.

 

There was a splendid discussion between Cobra and some other users a while back. Valuable thread.

 

It’s possible that Tyson might have beaten Frazier head to head but if we’re talking purely resume then Frazier is better.

- Olympic gold medalist
- began beating contenders at a stage when most prospects are fighting trial horses.
- practically no padding on the record
- single better win over Ali
- worst person he lost to was George Foreman

 

At least I know now that I should ignore your posts.

 

Tyson has greater depth of resume and was a better fighter. Easily ahead.

 

Tyson lost all his bouts vs other ATGs.

Frazier won the one where it mattered most, when both were undefeated and to determine the “real” champion.

The likes of Quarry/Ellis/Bonavena > Berbick/Smith/Tucker

Frazier was never upset or lost to the likes of journeymen level fighters. Plus got up every single time he was dropped.

 

If Frazier didn't have the Ali win, Tyson would have a case.

But, Frazier did...and Tyson doesn't.

 

You can argue it either way.

 

That was a gentlemanly reply. LMFAO.

 

I reckon Mike would be favored head to head but Joe has the better resume. He is the only man to beat a near prime Ali and he doesn't have the Holyfield debacle and losses to journeymen in his prime and at the end of his career.

 

Holyfield occurred less in Tyson's prime than Frazier was when getting crushed by Foreman. Tyson was good enough to win two belts while past his prime.