Yes very. He clean the division out but was in a weak era and only did it for a short period of time. He then got knocked out by Buster Douglas
He probably is a bit overrated. Still my favourite fighter though, who would ruin everyone in this era
he was exciting fighter boxer. one of best puncher ever seen. i remember excitement of the Tyson prime . no was never unbeatable / invincible. & yes has weak competition & wash up boxers in prime. & lost title with boxer heavyweight of ordinary type. stupid to say is unbeatable. too much flawed. but is excitement puncher good style & attract persons to boxing who is not boxing fan. is crossed over as star attraction for whole career. is gold dust for boxing. attract wide casual crowd = money machine even now today & is 56 year smoke weed stone head. they can pay to see on PPV fight! LOL
Overrated in terms of he was seen as a super human phenom. Over rated in terms of he was seen as literally unbeatable. But absolutely not over rated in terms of what he achieved. He unified and cleaned out a division (yeah I know he didn't fight Spoon, but Spoon lost his belt by 1st round "ko") at an incredibly young age. He had one of the greatest comebacks in heavyweight history icing Bruno and Seldo in under 10 minutes. He, after twice being stopped (DQ Schmee Cue), managed to knock out tough challenges in Botha, Norris, and Golota to retake the top ranking after Lewis. He then destroyed Etienne in a round. Up until 2003 which is 18 years into his career, including a prison stint, he only lost to Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis. All fighters he has an excellent chance of evening the score against had he fought them at his best. Any of those 3,against Tyson if the fight took place in 86, 87 or 88 probably lose imo. The guy is a bona-fide ATG. But he absolutely isn't the GOAT.
People are always saying that. Some of the best people with the smartest brains are saying that now. They come up to me all the time and say "Sir, Mike Tyson was absolutely tremendous, unbeatable in his prime," is what they say and they are saying that very strongly. I have letters, beautiful letters, they say this. I hear it on the street, I read it in many very beautifully written, respectful letters, they're saying it.
Don't dare bring Seldon in to the equation when trying to build up his legacy, that was a clear dive.
Underated nowadays if anything. He was dispatching respectable names a month or two apart at one point. Pretty sure he fought and beat two decent enough names 30 days apart at 19 years old. People dont really take into account the speed in which he done it all. Also dont take into account that his opponents we,re a lot more skilled than made out. If you look back....these guys had serious skills. All had good jabs. Could fight going forwards or backwards. Could move around every which way. Punch on the move. A much better variety of punches than we see nowadays. The more i watch boxing the less i see these skills. But the guys tyson was dispatching had them all. Unlike nowadays....they fought each other resulting in what would be seen as average records compared to nowadays when they all try to avoid each other making their records look better than they actually are. I still dont think tysons record will be beaten. You cant overrate that tbh. If their was a fault....it was that it was a short prime. I think people are entitled to criticise that. But the short reign he had at such a young age against good established fighters and the manner in which they we,re beaten will never be equaled. Silly to call that type of reign overrated unless its a longetivity issue....then fair enough. I think we all know what happened....he started living like a bad amatuer. At that point it was only gonna end up like it did. Was testament to how good he was....how long and competetive he remained. Was living and training like an amatuer against giys that prepared like professionals. His own fault....we can criticise it all day long. Doesnt change that his short prime is now underrated.