Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Check_Hook, Feb 25, 2011.
Add Berbick, Ruddock and Tucker to the list as well.
You forgot a few!
Mike Rodgers, 3-21-1
Jesse Clark, 0-19-0
Hubert Adams, 0-12-0
Tim Johnson, 5-25--0
Dave Johnson, 13-13-0
Henry Porter, 10-12-1
Jesse Clark, 0-27-0
Donny townsend, 2-7-0
David Bay, pro debut, knocked out Buster, round one!
Mike White, 12-5-1, knocked out Buster, round nine..
i guess you bleeped right over the part where he has beaten 5 current or future heavyweight champions....regardless of the **** fights mixed in, he won quite a few that counted..... and those guys you make fun ifm vitalis first 30 fights looked like that
Be honest, Mike Tyson was overrated
Yet this thread has made 7 pages and you are talking about him like he is still fighting!
The criticism that he lacked the big names doesn't really hold up. Only 5 or 6 heavyweight champions have resumes that are genuinely more impressive than his. He had surprising, and rather remarkable longevity for a fighter of his style. I think he's guaranteed for a spot inside the top 10 all time at Heavyweight.
He might have been overrated. He wasn't supposed to lose a fight until 1994/1996, to hear the scribes of his time.
Underated till 91.............. 95 till retirement was just a myth and overrated
Tyson was not over rated~ I am being honest~ he just lost his committment to the sport... However when he was where he was after unifying and prior to douglas he was not over rated, even when he got out of prison he was not over rated... he just has bad ****ing habits that put him in positions he likely would have never faced had he focused on his career..
keep in mind not all fighters have a long reign... a fighters prime comes and goes in the blink of an eye.
The visual evidence does not lie. You have to be a complete moron and utterly without any common sense let alone boxing acumen to fail to recognize just how amazing Tyson was.
The visual evidence assures that in 50 years, we'll still be hearing about Tyson like it was yesterday.
("Daddy, who was Kiltschko?"
Dad: "He was a boxer, son."
Son: "Did he murder people like Mike Tyson!?"
Dad: "No son, he had a pawing jab that was very effective"
(P.S Dad: "And it's a good ****ing thing Tyson came along before Wladimir, or you would have never knew who Tyson was."
not sure what your point is.....
now that i point out his record is not the worst ever for a heavyweight champ like you said, you have to go dig through his early opponents to state a different case now
obviously you have grown up knowing one era of boxing, which makes you look more stupid because you really know jack **** about the sport. period.
now run off and play
The Baddest Man on the Planet & Some:yep
Glad it was my time when he exploded onto the scene
The rotation of the planet wobbled whenever Tyson fought, from Headhunters to Eskimo's everyone new who Mike Tyson was & there's been no one since that he could'nt have thrashed in those 4 years when he rampaged through the heavyweight division.
He was the saviour of that division at that time as it had gone flat. Calling Tyson overated is just giving justification to eugenics in aborting spasticated TS's before they come on here:yep
86 tyson was fantastic. remember the size and the small reach he had. he beat so many opponents. he had good reflexes, amazing speed and punching power, great head movemant, was good on his feet and simply had a good boxing IQ. imagine tyson with more reach and 6'3 tall and you would have had a boxer who would have terrorized from ali,foreman, frazier too holy, lewis, klits within 1-4 rds, that what I believe.
Douglas was a legit contender to the title he was rightfully ranked and deserved his shot, most so called fans do not realize this about douglas because they tend to focus on the odds going into that fight 42-1 underdog....
Your a ****ing moron I will let the rest of the posters smash your ******ed ass up and down in this thread, keep replying I am in the mood for the cheap entertainment....