Tysons competition wasn't any worse than any other modern champions competition. His 9 title defenses were guys who were formidable fighters who could have made the top 10 in any era. Just because their names weren't Lyle or Quarry or Shavers doesn't mean they sucked. Outside of Ali, was Frazier's competition really a hell of a lot better than Tyson's? What about Joe Louis competition or Liston's?
I think its underrated Tyson basically cleaned up the division in a few short years and never avoided anyone ATG reign IMO.
Mostly he cleaned up the dregs of the previous generation, guys who got to claim they were former heavyweight titleholders because they played hot potato with belts but were never considered the top guy at any point during their time (Larry Holmes aside, but he was retired and just came back to collect a payday without a tuneup or a really ample time to train himself back into shape). Versus guys of his own generation, he lost to Holyfield x2, Buster Douglas and Lennox, missed Riddick Bowe and beat Razor Ruddock x2 and Tony Tucker … am I missing anyone? He could have fought Greg Page and Tim Witherspoon to finish his collection of 1980s second-tier action figures. Not bad but to a large degree he dined on leftovers.
He didn’t beat bums, he just beat Holmes’ older leftovers. It’s not Mike’s fault the division sucked when he was in his prime
He also ate Holmes for breakfast. That straight right that laid him flat out on the canvas was very impressive.
Mostly people that fell for that negative tyson narrative and they still hold those ignorant views years later, foolishly. Tyson was a great fighter, best of his generation and I feel the same way about people that try to bash his competition.
The same reason that the opposition of most ATG's get's criticized really. The significance of the wins get lost in the mists of time, leaving you with a list of forgotten men. If an opponent is not an ATG, then they pixilate as we move further from the event.
He cleaned up against who he had. In 1986, Ring magazines heavyweight ratings were : Champion - Michael Spinks 1 - Mike Tyson 2 - Bonecrusher Smith 3 - Pinklon Thomas 4 - Tim Witherspoon 5 - Tony Tubbs 6 - Trevor Berbick 7 - Buster Douglas 8 - Tony Tucker 9 - Frank Bruno 10 - Tyrell Biggs. He fought them all except Tim, which is impressive especially by todays standards, lost to one, and beat the rest decisively. He even beat four of them and grabbed two belts in one year (1987). It was the manner in which he won the fights too which impressed. A good number of pundits didn’t expect him to do it like that….Spinks wasn’t considered a pushover by most. If anything, Tyson diminished some of his own wins by making them look so easy. But to the original question, who knows? Probably just the usual confirmation bias which we all have. People will talk up the achievements of the fighters they like, and talk down those of the people they don’t.
The guys that Tyson beat would H2H be a handful for any champion through history. Could Joe Louis just sail through the 9 successful title defenses that Tyson made? Could Liston? Floyd Patterson? Muhammad Ali? I can see them winning, but they would have their share of sticky moments. It wouldn't be clear sailing. On the other hand, I can see prime Tyson decimating the men they made title defenses against (or in the case of Liston, his run of opponents up to the title). Even the 9 title defenses Ali made 64-67 (excluding Liston for the sake of argument), prime Tyson would have flattened those men relatively easy and Chuvalo I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say he's stopped on his feet after a very one sided beating. If you look at it from that perspective, Tyson's opponents really weren't that bad.
Thing about Spinks is, the ease in which he won, in some ways, diminishes the victory. In hindsight, Spinks seems like this scared, blown up light heavyweight that never had a chance and it was obvious all along. The reality is that a significant minority picked Spinks to win. Ali picked Spinks. Sugar Ray Leonard was hemming and hawing over who to pick. If Spinks had put on a Douglas-esque performance and then Tyson catches him with an 8th round uppercut and stops him, the win would ironically be rated much higher. Or, conversely, say if Spinks had moved up to heavyweight and Evander Holyfield was the undisputed champion. We all would favor Holyfield to stop Spinks late or win a clear decision. We would not expect a 1st round KO 90 seconds in. So if Spinks had fought Holyfield instead and gave him a spirited battle, but was stopped in the 11th round, that win against the undefeated, never been stopped, never been knocked down ATG light heavyweight champion Michael Spinks would be rated much higher.
