My point is you can't compare Tyson's first 14 professional fights to Itauma simply because Tyson was fighting every 3 weeks. So saying Itauma may or may not have fought better opposition than Tyson after 14 professional fights. Is missing a huge context in regards to how active both fighters were/are in comparison.
I think it's the biggest part tbh Fighters know they are being paid to fight a golden boy want paying as such That mentality would still be there if Turki and Dana didn't exist I remember reading years ago Tysons inital opposition were paid modestly at best For the life of me I can't recall the publication but it made alot of sense at the time
Mike Tyson is obviously more accomplished than Itauma, but trying to use the "but he fought more!" argument when most of those fighters were club level isn't a genuine argument. The comparison was on who they fought as their 14th opponent.
There is no comparison because Tyson fought 14 professional fights in less than a year. Whilst Itauma is in his 3rd year. That's the point.
Doesn't matter, because the comparison is on the 14th opponent. Not how many club fighters Tyson churned through in 3 years.
Yes it does matter and there's big missing context without mentioning it instead of just listing the number of 14 professional fights. How about comparing Tyson's 3rd year as a professional to Itauma ?
Compare away, I've already acknowledged Mike Tyson is more accomplished. But that wasn't the comparison you disagreed with.
The comparison I disagreed with was what another poster said comparing Itauma's 14 professional fights over 3 years to Tyson's 14 professional fights in less than a year.
The comparison was on their first 14 opponents and their quality, not the length of time it took to fight them.
But the length of time is a big context why it can't be compared which you somehow fail to comprehend.
Why should it be considered when the bulk of that are essentially club level fighters? Is this also a standard you hold any other Heavyweight in the past 25 years to? It's an unfair standard and doesn't take into context how boxing has evolved since then. The comparison was of their first 14 opponents. You introduced another factor to discredit that, one that doesn't apply to modern heavyweights at all. The point is that as a prospect Itauma is fighting a reasonable level of opposition considering the number of fights that he has had. He'd likely fight Usyk next if offered.
It's a flawed and poor comparison to begin with, as Dynamic was showing. Anyone can compare a Ford Escort to a Ford Mustang. Compare a Jr high school basketball player to an NBA player. Comparisons, in order to be valid, should have some level of equality to make them valid and worthy of a comparison. A lot of Tyson's early opponents, the ones you call club fighters, may never have accounted to anything. But Tyson's activity is what kept him razor sharp and in great shape year round. Ituama is far from that even in his third year as a pro.
It isn't good for modern standards either though ? Joshua fought 14 professional fights in less than 2 years and won a commonwealth belt. It isn't an unfair comparison ? It's adding context. Fighting 14 professional fights in less than a year is a whole lot different than fighting 14 professional fights over 3 years. Especially when the former won a world title and made multiple title defences in the same amount years as Itauma has been a professional.
fighters/managers knew the game then too. If it was as you say, wouldn’t almost all prospects in past or even just Tyson’s era be brought on fighting 2/3 times a month? paying 2-3 opponents a month costs money. Mike Tyson was an anomaly as he had the financial support and was connected with the right people. Like nepotism
I don't think comparing fighters from different eras is easy to begin with, and I do see your point, but you'll always have "yeah but" if you add in more criteria. As for AJ? He's had arguably the biggest backing of any Heavyweight boxer out there today. Compare their 14th fight and tell me who you think is looking more promising.