Mike Tyson

Tyson's head movement defense and bobbing and weaving was key to his
early success. I mean look at the botha fight, great knockout but he was
all about one punch. Prime Tyson Rooney style would have could have been
Top 3 undisputed. Tyson's a complex person and c'mon he would have ate
holyfield alive pre prison

 

Not to the extent you use it to make your case that Tyson wasnt that great. Thats the point.

 

37-0 with 8 title defenses, yeah just a few seconds.

 

Whoever ranks Tyson outside the top 15 is just trying to go against the grain an sound different.

 

Look at what he wrote and then look at what I answered, genius.

 

I think a lot of people forget that Tyson packed in a good amount of title defenses and wins in a short period of time. I dont think longevity necessarily defines a fighter, if the substance is there. Tyson had a careers worth of top level wins in a very short period of time. More wins than most of his peers at the point they started to decline, so although Tyson might have been 23 or 24, he started to decline.

 

wasnt it 9 defences?

 

Don't have a lot time to read what has been written but only to add a few thoughts. Primes, by definition, do not last long... especially with swarmer types who rely on speed, balance, timing and coordination.

I will pick Tyson's prime to be from early 1986 thru the Williams fight in mid 1989, basically three and a half years. During this time he beat former and future champs Berbick, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Holmes, Tubbs, Spinks and Bruno, all except for Spinks being large modern sized heavies, all except for Smith and to some degree Berbick being extremely well-schooled, top-rate boxers.

For Dempsey's prime, we have late 1917 until whenever rust set in about 1921 or so. He beat Morris, Brennan a few times, a healthy and a not so healthy Miske, Pelkey, Fulton, Lewinsky and an inactive Willard. I don't think I would pick any of these to beat any of those Tyson fought, except maybe the underrated Miske outboxing Smith. Also, many of the fights early in his prime were 4 rounders and he in fact lost one to Fat Willie Meehan during the same run. When comparing size and boxing skills (in as much as we can), Dempsey's group pales (figuratively and literally as there were no negro opponents in this stretch) to Tyson's.

Outside of Bunyan-esque mythmaking, I can see no basis on which to rank the Dempsey's prime above Tyson's prime.

 

I think he's definatley below Ali, Louis, Marciano and Lewis.

Probably below Holmes and Foreman.

Interchangeable with Frazier, Liston and Holyfield.

Any lower than 10 and you're talking to a ****ing hipster. (ie. Unforgivtard)

 

Definitely above Lewis, who is a lock for the top 14.

 

:rofl

I agree with most of this but have Master Ty at 7 with Foreman and Lewis right below him, Frazier at 10 with Holyfield at 11 and Liston 12.

9 defenses in his first reign, which at the time was only behind Louis, Ali and Holmes. Not bad at all. Considering the way he dismantled top contenders like nobody before him makes it all the more impressive.

 

Oh im sorry Dickhead, Tyson fell 3 minutes short of going the distance with evander in the 1st fight....That must make him overrated :blood

 

Doesn't make him overrated, kinda a big detail though.

 

I think mike should have retired after the Botha fight...He DID loses badly to buster & evander, but he went out like a man both times, after absorbing a ton of punishment...and like Lefthook says, i also find it funny that 96 Tyson is considered Holyfields best win

 

For someone not worthy of a p4p ranking I find it quite ironic that he was #1 p4p for 3 years in a row (87,88,89) above Hagler, Holyfield, Kalambay, Chavez. Impressive for a Heavyweight. His body of work, when you look at number of ranked contenders beat is alot higher than many of his peers. Ranking him at number 7 is fair though.

That's not a prerequisite for greatness nor is it even a real barometer. Frankly I think it's silly to use that criteria.

By the way Jim Jeffries and Lennox Lewis never did but I'd imagine they are still great. Right?

Evander Holyfield without the Tyson win would not make any top 10 list. In fact, Mike Tyson MADE Evander Holyfield. He validated his career.

Bowe in 1993, considering he lost by MD, could have argued that Holyfield didn't do enough to take his crown and frankly scoring the fight a draw isn't out of the question. Some people even have Bowe winning the fight.

Tyson was the standard bearer and has been for his entire career. Bowe in 1993 was fat and unmotivated in the same manner as was in Tyson in 1996. I think that when you take in account the perception of Tyson, the decisiveness of the win it immediately becomes clear that the Tyson win is greater.

He's definately below Louis, Ali, Maricano and Holmes.

I've heard enough arguments to believe that he's interchangeable with Lewis and Holyfield.

I'd say he's above Liston, Frazier and Foreman.

9 title defense.