Personally I don't give too much weight to that. First of all because it's hypothetical and secondly because I believe boxing has evolved. And in Tyson's case, yes, he looks great on film, at times sensational, and he ripped through a lot of contenders like they were nothing. Much like Golovkin today. But just like with Golovkin you can make the case that the quality of his opponents wasn't all that. Who was the best Tyson beat with his quality ot the time taken into consideration? Holmes was obviously great, but he was also rusty and at least five years past his best. So Tucker is probably a good shout here. Other candidates would be Smith and Ruddock. Perhaps Williams, Golota, Bruno and Biggs as well. Good, solid contenders in their prime, but nothing beyond that. Mike looked impressive beating most of them, but he never beat anyone as good as a prime Holy, Bowe or Lewis. Of course, not many has. But the question remains, even if you think a h2h-hypothetical weighs heavily (which I personally don't), how much mileage do a fighter get in such a hypothetical for looking great against medium competition?
well Ali was past it against Holmes but came in at 220 looking in great shape! He was Ferrari without engine? Why did ali had to loose all that weight if he is HW? Maybe Tyson had same approach to that of ali! There was storys that he was 240 2 weeks before douglas fight.
He did not age well in terms of his all time ranking because the general consensus is he was a front runner and lacked the will to win at all costs of other ATG champions. One cannot imagine Tyson in a tough fight like Ali Frazier 3 as an example. He did not have what it took to take the kind of beating Frazier as an example took but not quit on himself.
An underprepared Tyson didn't quit on himself against Douglas, what makes you think a prime and ready Mike wouldn't?
Not quit but could not handle a losing fight. No plan B. Unlike Frazier as an example who lost the first five rounds vs Ali but kept fighting his fight making it an even bout after 10. Tyson always became something quite less than Tyson in a losing bout. Front runner...bully mentality. What added to this thought is that he indeed did want to quit and did quit in his last several losses. His corner begged him not to quit vs Lewis.
Fanboy? I'm a grown man, who fights and studies fights. I don't sit and look at records, I sit and look at fights. You're right there is no use of you arguing with me as you have zero meaningful insight about the fight game, I study fighters, you study names on a paper. There's a big difference between you and me, you're a couch critic, I respect every man who puts on gloves because I know what it takes. You call me a fanboy yet you are the one who holds severe bias I however study fights and base an educated opinion whilst taking into account all the variables, you know nothing about he sport apart from a little literature. Once again, don't reply to me unless you guys have some meaningful insight into the fight game and not some biased garbage
Great point. However I believe the manner in which he took on these fighters, and basically put them into survival mode speaks volumes of his calibre. Tucker is a class fighter who would give a number of ATGs a run for their money.
Great summation. Right before Tyson lost to Douglas he was considered, and prematurely, not only the best heavyweight of all time but being talked about as the best fighter ever. That's how far ahead of the curve he was. He was able to accomplish in 3 years a helluva lot more than other All Time Greats achieved in their entire career. I rank him at #6-8 at heavyweight and right up there Head 2 Head. A friend of mine had compared every heavyweight's record, their opponent's record, combined the totals and Tyson came in at #2 and missed out on the top spot by one point.
If you compare Tyson's opponents with other heavyweight ATG's opponents, he comes out ahead most of the time. Not only Tucker but the way he dismantled Frazier, Berbick, Thomas, Biggs, Tubbs, Holmes, Spinks, Bruno, Williams and for those who say he ccouldn't win a lopsided decision there's Green, Bonecrusher, Tucker, Ruddock. Put those trolls on ignore. No need to argue with them.
So what this all this ****e from you and the other idiot fan boy kid micro lite boils down to is your so called " baddest man on the planet " hero was sweet fuk all without Rooney. So what was this freak? A super destructive instinctive killing machine, or a over hyped numpty off the Catskills production line? You can't have it both ways. And you pair of fools claim to know everything there is to know about combat sport? Go away the pair of you, and come back when you learn ANYTHING about anything, never mind the fight game, it is far too complicated for you.
I have him in the lower half of the top ten, but I think that a strong argument can be made for a top five ranking.
There are thousands of stories regarding the Tyson / Douglas fight. All of them are feeble excuses initiated by Tyson fan boys, and should be treated with the contempt they deserve. He came up against a guy who decided before entering the ring to hit him harder and more often than he got hit himself. He wasn't scared sh, itless like all the bums and junkies that laid down before Tyson, or the second rate fighters that had no chance of winning anyway. He just decided to batter the guy. It really is that simple.:yep
His record and his perfomances tell their own story. He was terrible without Kevin Rooney in his corner. With Rooney 35-0 Without Rooney 13-6
