Mike Tysons resume was rubbish in a weak era.

It may be beneficial to either know something about the subject matter of your statements or research said subject matter…Better math skills could also be beneficial…

Fix those things and, good post.

 

So many lemon sucking threads...

 

Man, you're right we really needed another thread on why Mike was a crap.

 

That is not Tyson's fault was it?

 

what world should tyson have gone to in order to unify all the titles. what a shyte thread.

 

Tyson would have knocked Wilder out early!

 

God Give Me Strength....

 

I think it was an average era at best. During recent era's the heavyweight division was depleted due to too many contenders eating themselves out of contention, but in the 80's it was drugs that ravaged the contenders of that time. Tucker, Thomas, Biggs etc all never reached their full potential because of drugs.

Tyson could only fight who was there and he fought almost everyone that mattered and utterly dominated them in devastating fashion. The Holmes win I think is underrated. Holmes yes was 38 but he was an ATG and he would go on to beat Mercer at 42, give Holyfield a competitive fight at 42 and give McCall a very tough fight at 45. That 38 year old Holmes that Tyson fought might of very well had enough to beat Holyfield and McCall based off how he did later on when he had faded more.

 

I don’t think tyson’s era was any weaker than what we have today.

 

and tyson, true.

 

Larry wasn't out 3 years & certainly had a lot more than a month to prepare.

I believe the Mike Tyson who entered the ring against Larry Holmes that night would have beaten any heavyweight there ever was.

It was Tyson at his very best.

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

Joshua has a better resume (based on wins) than Tyson.