Tyson or K-brothers who fought better competion?

agree . i was about to highlight them too ,but you covered it. easy

 

Tyson fought better competition. It's not even close.

Ruddock
Holyfield
Lewis
Bruno
Holmes
Spinks


Vitali fought Lewis.
Wlad's greatest opponent was Chris Byrd.

 

I don't want to stray too far off on a tangent here, but - people really rate Smith over Brock? Is this the Twilight Zone?

In a time-machine h2h, Brock boxes donuts around Smith.

In terms of resume (of wins), they're probably about even.

Smith lost...a lot. He lost to some boxers who were...not very good. Brock lost to the best of his generation, and to someone who's arguably top five of his generation (and in the opinion of many, would have been the #1 cruiserweight of the generation had he not been chasing the money instead).

(Again, my answer to the titular question is obviously Tyson. That one minor bugaboo is just sticking in my craw, though, and I just can't let it go :yep)

 

Some of Tyson's opponents were not so good.

 

I like Smith a lot. Big, powerful, great chin in his prime. First college graduate to win a piece of the title.

But a late starter to boxing who had very little skill, and was hardly what one might call a "warrior."

He beat terrible Tim, one of my 80's favs, but in an earlier fight, Witherspoon outboxed him with ease. Fact is, Witherspoon felt he was being ripped off by Don King and did not train, was strung out on drugs and underestimating Bonecrusher because of how easy he had it earlier, and just got caught.

Could Brock have beat him? I would pick Smith. But they not that divergent in talent. Smith was bigger, more powerful, better chin, and for whatever reason had a much better high end win, so you can say he had the better intangibles. Brock was much better schooled without being a standout in anything.

 

It's like a scab I can't stop picking at...
http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=253462

 

Comparing two fighters against one isn't fair, but even with that Tyson easily had better opposition. Part of it is because of current HW state, and part because Klitschkos started to fight the best relatively late in their careers (so they missed the possibility to win even with slightly past-prime great and good fighters of 90's).

 

Tyson fought and beat better competition.

 

atsch

 

I think he meant to type Tyson, but accidently typed Klitsko. Most definitely that you have to watch some fights of the list Tyson fought.

 

I Favor Tyson but he also fought more drug addicts,head cases,etc then Klitschko.

 

Williams gave a prime Holmes a fight for his life and I think Williams desered the title back then.

 

Its not just the fact that Tyson faced better competiton, it's the way he disposed of them.

He brutally destroyed those guys within a few rounds.

Has Wlad done anything like that with a contender?

Not even close.

 

Bonecrusher did lose some, but the Banker's boxing career is still ongoing and plenty of room for more losses. On top of that, Bonecrusher won a title. If we were to throw the Banker back in those days, he would had had plenty of losses.

 

No this guy really means the Klitscko's, he defiantly needs to go watch some of Tyson's opponents :verysad