Mike Tyson's amazing NEGATIVE records

This is the most amusing post I’ve read in a while.

“Ali tricked him, doesn’t count.”

There’s a reason people say boxing is 90 percent mental and Ali was a master of psychological warfare as well as physical warfare. He employed a strategy that led to victory, same as any other fighter who ever won a fight.

Holyfield “was way more skilled” than Foreman … and Big George was way more powerful than Holy. And Holyfield was a blown-up cruiserweight — yet he rag-dolled ‘iron’ Mike.

The rest is equally amusing. Lots of pressure fighters lasted — Henry Armstrong was no flash in the pan, nor was JC Chavez. I could give you a list longer than Tyson’s prison sentence of pressure fighters who didn’t flame out the way Mike’s iron melted in the heat.

I don’t have Tyson in my top 10. You do. Good for you.

 

The WBO wasn't a major title in 1999? When exactly did it become a major title? I missed the announcement that it was officially a MAJOR? Who made the big announcement?

By 1999, Riddick Bowe, Vitali Klitschko, George Foreman, Michael Moorer, Ray Mercer, Tommy Morrison had all fought for or held the WBO title.

Foreman lost a WBO title opportunity in the fight preceding his title win over Michael Moorer for the WORLD title.

Lewis and Holyfield fought for the World Title in 1999. They could've fought for two belts ... or one ... or none ... and it would've been a fight for the World Heavyweight Title.

It didn't have anything to do with the "value" of their "belts."

(Hell, Holyfield fought for the vacant WBA belt in his very next fight after Lewis. That's how much 'major' value that belt had.)

You have a misquided notion about belts. Something tells me you're new at this.

 

So did Tyson. He beat Holmes and Spinks

 

I followed boxing the whole time. I don't need a Youtube video.

Lewis and Holyfield wasn't a World title fight because they had three belts.

If Lewis and Holyfield fought for the vacant WBO belt in 1999 it would've been for the WORLD title.

Which belts they had didn't matter. If they told all the sanctioning bodies to go to hell and dropped their straps and fought for NO belts, it would've still been for the World Heavyweight Title.

Bowe threw the WBC belt in a garbage bin in 1992. How much value as a "major" belt did it have? He was still the world champion whether he kept it or not.

Mike Tyson held all the alphabet belts that existed in 1987, he wasn't the WORLD champion.

Michael Spinks was.

Now you want to argue when the WBO became "major."

Who the World Champion is has nothing to do with which belt they have.

That's the fundamental flaw in this thread and your OP

Mike Tyson beat two WORLD heavyweight champions - Holmes and Spinks. He lost to three World Champions -- Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis.

NONE of them held all the alphebt belts that existed during their respective eras, but they were all the World Heavyweight Champion at one point.

 

And you're WRONG!!!!!

It was for the undisputed World Heavyweight Title because it was for the World Heavyweight Title ... not alphabet belts.

If the WBA said, a week before the fight, that it was stripping Evander, and they still fought, would it no longer have no longer been for the World Title?

Was Lewis no longer the undisputed World Heavyweight Champion when the WBA took the belt back before his next fight?

Jesus Christ.

Who am I talking to? Devin Haney?

I'm done.

Tyson beat Holmes and Spinks. He's not 0-3. He's 2-3. And Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis never held all the heavyweight belts available during their era, either.

Your entire premise for this thread is flawed.

 

Despite still not explaining how a so called Undisputed champion can have a dispute with another fighter and yet still claim the said championship, I will play along; I get it; you are Senor Mendoza of the WBA; still bitter about the splits in your organisation that caused the birth of the other three well known alphabet organisations…


We do not agree with much on this forum, but I suspect the one subject most of the people on Classic agree with is alphabet crap. You can argue over the merits of them all you want, but all you are saying is you prefer dog crap to cat crap…

 

Reflex fighters have the shortest shelf lives because they rely on reflexes which invariably slow with ages. It's simple physiology and it's irrefutable.

 

Oh bull, Never?

"Your" wikipedia page currently lists Canelo as the undisputed champ at super middleweight, but David Morrell is a WBA super middleweight champion. It also currently lists George Kambosas is as the undipusted lightweight champion, but Devin Haney has a WBC lightweight belt and Gervonta Davis has a WBA lightweight belt.

There are three guys with WBC and WBA belts in those two divisions who aren't named Alvarez and Kambosas. They were given the same WBC and WBA belts Canelo and Kambosas were handed. The belts look identical. They pay sanctioning fees when they defend, just like Canelo does and Kambosas will.

Aren't the WBC and WBA two of your "major" belts?

The undisputed champion is the LINEAL/World Champion.

It has nothing to do with who has which belts.

And I can tell you weren't even alive in 1999 or following boxing, because nobody in boxing thought Lennox Lewis was no longer undisputed World Champion - after he beat Holyfield - because the WBA decided to award Evander their vacant WBA belt in Evander's next fight.