Why do people think Tyson is a top ten Heavyweights?

Up to the 1980's, I would say yes. Now he's just outside of the top ten. The trouble with Tyson is he badly lost his biggest fights, and had issues staying focused outside the ring. I think he was a bit protected in the 1990's, never sharing with ring with guys who could have beaten him in Tua, Sanders, Ibeabuchi, Bowe ( fight was talked about ) a focused Mercer, McCall, those types...

 

Tyson ducking Ray Mercer is funny.

Mercer was an all round tough guy but nothing special.

He lost or was on his way to losing pretty much every single significant fight in his career.

This is a guy who struggled vs Boogeyman Ferguson a journeman Tysn handled years prior.

Also, didn't Mercer get caught trying to bribe Ferguson?

Regarding the foreman issue, this has been done countless times.

King put Tyson and Foreman on a bill together to set up future fight between the two, Foreman himself admitted he didn't sign on the dotted line due to fear of King and not Tyson.

After all that bravado and name calling, poor old George got freaked out by Don King. Boo boo.

Tyson ducking Foreman is one the biggest lies in history, right next to "Mayweather was scared of Khan".

Utter nonsense.

 

Is this top ten based on accomplishments or h2h?

 

Did Buster Douglas matter during that time ?
For an example.

I don't wish to be 100% literal, but you said "entire division", yet he didn't even beat the entire list of rated contenders. "ENTIRE" is an exaggeration, even in a limited sense.
In fact he lost to Buster Douglas, who was rated before and during his reign, in February 1990, but your cut-off is conveniently a few weeks before that.

I don't think guys like Bruno, Biggs and old Holmes "mattered" more than the likes of Witherspoon, Damiani, Norris or Dokes.

 

Makes sense to be more scared King! He definitely damaged more careers.

 

Well, that perception was proved wrong.
Holyfield would have been built up as a heavyweight contender regardless of Tyson's success.

 

I think a far stronger case can be made for him being inside the top 10 than outside it.

 

Where did I say duck? History shows he did not match them, and picked much softer touches in the 1990's That is fact.

Mercer at his best gave Holyfield and Lewis tough fights, two men who destroyed Tyson.

 

Because there aren't ten heavyweights who were better than him.

 

When exactly did Tyson face these soft touches?

The only time you can make accusations is later on in his career from 2000 onwards when he fought Francis, Norris etc.

Rather than waiting for Mike Tysons charity, what did these other so called threats do? Tua? Ibeabuchi?

Implode and do basically **** all with their careers.

Tyson fought the fighters who mattered, win lose or draw. Out of the other great fighters of his era, he fought Holyfield, Holmes and Lewis and was scheduled to fight Vitali once he'd got past Williams, but that didn't work out.

Tyson was inactive for about 6 years out of the 90s, despite this he fought Ruddock twice, Holyfield twice, Bruno, Botha, Golota and Stewart amongst others.

That hardly sounds like someone who was looking for soft touches.

Sanders was never discussed, neither was Tua, neither was Ibeabuchi. You cant duck someone when there were never any negotiations in the first place.

Regarding Mcall, King had it outlined that once Tyson beat Holyfield, Moorer, Mcall and Morrison, Foreman and Briggs were next, obviously after the bite fight, King and Tyson went their seperate ways so those fights never materialised.

Speaking of Mcall, Did he not have the WBC belt around the time Tyson was released from prison? Which he won from Lewis? And who did Mcall lose this belt to? The same guy Tyson beat. Frank Bruno.

George Foreman had the WBA belt around the time Tyson was released, Foreman instead of defending it against Tucker (for fear of losing) dropped the belt instead. This vacant belt was fought for between Seldon and Tucker. The same Seldon who went on to lose his belt to Tyson.

So two of Tysons belts post prison were directly because of Foreman and Mcall, the same guys he apparently dodged.

 

I think Tyson fought a pretty solid list of titlists and challengers who were relevant at that time, mostly, one after the other. At a pretty demanding schedule.
That is rightly celebrated.

On the other hand, reigning just 3 years at the top means he didn't get a great crop or new waves of contenders, he worked over most of the current list, some of which were fading contenders or guys who were briefly ranked. He ended up losing to one of the middling guys on the list.

That is two aspects of the same thing, it balances itself out.

Take Wladimir Klitschko as a counter example, he's from the 1996 Olympic class. Regardless of his losses, during his actual years of monotonous domination, he was beating contenders from the 2000 Olympic class, the 2004 Olympic class, new waves of contenders. People readily dismiss his challengers, "even Tyson's crop was better" but they often ignore the difficulty in staying around and defending the fort against waves of new young contenders.

I'm not saying Wlad is good or anything though.

 

I also forgot to mention, Tyson actually was scheduled to face Ray Mercer in 2002, but the fight fell through because Lennox Lewis came knocking.

 

That's true. That was a ridiculously risky fight for Tyson's camp to want, assuming they wanted the Lewis payday too. It would have drawn well though because Mercer was so durable.
I was looking forward to it, at the time I thought it was 50-50, although I hadn't seen Mercer for a while.
In hindsight, I'd favour Mercer, but I'll have to watch the Wlad-Mercer fight again to see what's up.
Basically, Tyson was shot to pieces in 2002, and Mercer even then was better than the Brian Nielsen's of this world.

 

If I remember correctly both Tyson and Mercer were knocked out that same year by Lewis and Klitcko.

Although Mercer was known to be durable, he was shell by 2002, if I remember correctly after the Lewis fight, he faded away into obscurity fighting jus bums and a washed up
Witherspoon.

But the point is, Tyson had agreed to face Mercer. No signs of ducking there.

 

Yeah, Mercer was probably just as shot.

No, Tyson wouldn't have ducked Mercer, makes no sense.
Tyson generally fought who he was told to fight by whatever promoter had for him. He did pull a few sick notes now and then, fights getting cancelled or re-scheduled or whatever but I can't remember anything that looked like a duck.
Ruddock maybe, 1989.
And he fought the guy twice in 1991, Ruddock having iced Dokes in the meantime, so if that was ever a duck it was well and truly redeemed.