Those of us who were too young for prime Tyson should appreciate what Jones is doing.

exactly what i was thinking. the ufc isnt AS big as people make it out to be

 

Mark Kerr's impact at the time reminded me a little of Tyson. Perhaps not so much in retrospect.

 

Flea mate, you know I'm your biggest fan, :good but irritating as it may be he gave you a great touché, I was giggling when I read it.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-s8MlzzN9U[/ame]

 

popularity doesn't mean ****. its the opinion of those that know and respect the sport that matters. I'm a big fan of tyson but, he didn't beat any great fighters simliar to prince naseem who I look up to. Both awesome to watch but, not the best.

its true tyson wasn't in his prime when he fought the greats but, that's a different story. In a sport of action nobody remembers the "what ifs"

 

tell me, who is the greatest fighter tyson beat? :yep

 

Larry Holmes, and I don't think of this as a negative. Larry was only a couple years removed from his title reign, and went on to defeat an undefeated Ray Mercer 4 years after the Tyson loss. Holmes also fought a good fight against Holyfield, losing 7 rounds to 5(all scored 10-9) on my card. That's a round away from being a draw.

Tyson was the youngest heavyweight champion ever, and had the best blend of speed and power ever seen in a fighter. He came out a winner in twelve title bouts. Tyson had the ability to rank higher, but lacked the discipline. He never bested another fighter that was close to being in his class (Larry Holmes was 37); but Trevor Berbick, James Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, Tony Tubbs, and Frank Bruno were all world titlists at some point in their careers. The knock on Tyson is that he never really overcame adversity in his fights, but when you were as skilled as he was you don't come across adverse situations all that often.

 

The larry win was not impressive for somebody looking to achieve "great" status. He was not the same man although still above a good boxer. I see this topic getting on muddy ground already. Lets just say it was about equal to a bones win over henderson at this point.

 

fixed

 

Really? Popularity doesn't mean ****? Isn't that kinda one of the points of this thread? I grew up during Tyson. I was in junior highschool when he schooled Larry Holmes. All anyone could ever talk about was Tyson. We played his video game. We read about him fighting Tony Mandrich and tons of other athletes in who's the toughest and baddest man on the planet. We were little kids who knew who Tyson was...without the internet and streaming and pay per view (I think pay per view was starting out, but most things were closed circuit). Imagine Jon Jones without pay per views and internet forums and mma not having TUF or youtube? LOL. I can only imagine how popular and known he would be without all that.

Tyson was popular because he was a beats. He transcended the sport. His fights were big news. They were big because he was an animal in the ring that captured everyone's imagination. Jon Jones is just another good mma fighter.

Unfortunate for those who are too young to have been around for Tyson in the 80's. If the OP had been, he never would have made this thread.

 

Popularity...

 

What a wank thread....

 

Within MMA at the time yes. But realistically no one outside of the hardcore early Vale Tudo fans and Amateur Wrestlers knew who Mark was. He was virtually unknown. This thread though has to be one of the most ridiculous analogy's iv ever seen.