Why do some people rate Frazier above Tyson?

Frazier was a better fighter than Tyson, Frazier had better wins than Tyson. H2H, Frazier KO's Tyson.

 

Frazier fought Ali after a 3 1/2 year layoff, similar to Holyroid beating Tyson...He had an iron will, but, one big punch, the left hook...

Seems crazy to rate him above Tyson but, enough people hate Tyson...

 

Seen all of those fights and he was never dominated for rounds at a time or faced complete momentum shifts multiple times. Sorry dude, even in the Bruno fight he was never in so much trouble that he had to counter his way out over a period of rounds. Mike being challenged over the period of an entire fight might of happened 3x's in his career prior to 1990. And I'm not talking some one staying on their feet throwing expendable punches just to get through a round. I mean where he was made to fight like Frazier vs Chuvalo or Frazier vs Ali I! Mike never had any such experience until it was too late!

 

Who did he show this against?


Anyways the win over a slightlyfaded Ali makes him the greater heavyweight.

Tyson would clip him in a round or two though. A smaller, weaker, slower, 1 handed, 1 eyed, less skilled version of himself would be a decimation.

 

This is the obvious answer.

 

Frazier couldn't get up 160lbs over his head, but he could whuup your ass.

His win over Ali > anything Tyson did.

 

Who did Tyson beat that a focused and determined Jerry Quarry would not beat?

 

Probably a bunch of the large skilled lazy heavyweights that inhabited the 80's. Don't overrate the 60's and 70's that badly. The contenders were strong but they weren't era-smashers.

What did Frazier have over Tyson? I give you punch output late in the fight, but do you really think it makes it there?

Do you really trust a guy to stand infront of Tyson at Fraziers height? Tyson used to make 205 pound heavies fly across the ring with shots.

Tyson was simply a much better fighter than Joe, bigger, more skilled, more versatile, quicker.

 

Norton should be rated above Tyson as well then? :huh

 

Considering he's 1-4 against the best fighters he's faced I'd argue otherwise.

Tyson is better; his record of being the youngest to the title, his run to the title was blemish free and spectacular, has more title defenses, he also cleared out his division more impressively I should add and after his first loss he did more with his career than Frazier's did after Joe's first loss.

Tyson also has more depth in his resume:

Spinks, Holmes, Tucker, Biggs, Ruddock 2x, Bruno 2x, P. Thomas, Berbick, Smith, Tubbs, C. Williams, Stewart, Botha, Golota, Savarese.

Take 15 names on Frazier's resume and see how it stacks up. Frazier has the signature victory but not enough depth to go with it.

Beating Ali gets him far but losing in Manila subtracts from his legacy as opposed to adding to it. After all, I've seen people rank Holyfield ahead of Tyson yet they rip for losing to a fighter who they rank ahead of him anyway and I never got that. But in Frazier's case, lets face it; he was behind on points in an exciting fight and on his way to losing the rubber match against his bitter rival and the towel was thrown. In today's world of ESB and internet arm chair warriors he'd be called a quitter, he'd be ridiculed. Nobody gave credit to Tzsyu for fighting gallantly against a very determined Ricky Hatton; instead they questioned him. Frazier benefited from time and the media outlets that gave him the deference that a former respectable Heavyweight Champion deserved and for those not around to see it or those not old enough to remember, it shaped our opinion on the matter.

I don't see a reason to rate Frazier above Tyson really. He ranks high, don't get me wrong but Tyson based on objective criteria ranks higher.

 

And Michael Spinks, who was considerably better at 175.

I don't like the style matchup for Frazier either. Tyson was the faster starter, explosive with his uppercuts, harder to hurt from single shots, better variety of punches.

I think it ends fairly early and in ugly fashion for Joe.

 

Prime Michael Spinks at 6'3", 212 lbs would have boxed Quarry's ears off. He would not be intimidated by Quarry unlike he did against Tyson.

Larry Holmes wold probably do the same.

And I am not sure Quarry would beat Ruddock or TUcker either.

 

Damn good post. :good

In today's standards, Frazier would be called not only a quitter, but also ONE DIMENSIONAL (only had left hook) and glass chinned given how many times he's been down.

 

This post is simultaneously arrogant and ignorant. That's really not a winning combination.

 

I would pick Pinklon Thomas, Razor Ruddick, Trevor Berbick, Frank Bruno, Michael Spinks, Tony Tubbs and even the version of Holmes who faced Tyson, all over Jerry.