Why is Tysons competition poo pooed

Tate was coming off a brutal KO loss. The Page and Thomas were decent wins. Bey wasn't anything special.

Losing to guys like Snipes and Mercado, going life and death with Mitch Green (who was trash) and drawing with Leroy Caldwell doesn't help your argument at all. Berbick was a decent B- level fighter at best.

 

Tate was also coming off being ahead of Weaver going into round 15. He probably could fight a little bit.

Berbick would definitely have a winning record against the B listers of Louis' and Marciano's time. Those guys wouldn't be beating Thomas, Tate, and Page.

 

Marciano fought three blown up light heavyweights , a small cruiserweight and 37 year old Joe Walcott , all 194 of him. If you have a case for the being similar let's be specific .. I disagree.

 

Some odd kind of pretzel logic to use a **** conviction to defend someone — I don’t condone or like him because he raped someone if that means anything, but how about we talk about the merits of the topic rather than hide behind Tyson’s criminal past?

Tyson btw postponed fights with Holyfield at least three times — once claiming a non-contact rib injury (October 1991 … the fight was supposed to take place in November), then when he was convicted, and yet again after losing to Holyfield the first time when he was allegedly cut in sparring while training for the rematch. Those are all documented facts.

What would I do? Well, I wouldn’t **** anyone so I really can’t answer that.

 

I fail to understand what weights have to do with anything.

Were there larger fighters Marciano could have fought who were more highly-rated? Didn’t Ezz make like 10 defenses of the title? Now he’s a lightweight or something?

Like Rocky, Tyson fought the remnants of a previous generation of heavyweights. He didn’t fight Riddick Bowe, he didn’t fight Lewis until it was last call for Mike and he wanted the big payday even though he was washed, and he fought Holyfield well after Evander’s best days. He didn’t clean out the division of the top guys of his day (Buster Douglas, who wasn’t a washed-up leftover from the 1980s, beat him). Rocky did.

 

Tate suffered one of the worst KO losses in history and his brain was scrambled. It was comparable to Walcott's KO of Charles. You aren't spinning this into some amazing win. If it were Foreman beating a John Tate coming off a brutal KO loss you'd be fighting tooth and nail for 20 pages trying to convince people it was a bad win.

I could actually see Nova or Valdez beating some of those guys. Resume doesn't tell the whole story, the eye test and boxing ability/style clashes are important too. Berbick was the Dillian Whyte of the 80's: a decent, strong, brave, but flawed, inconsistent competitor with poor fundamentals and leaky defense who occasionally won big fights but also lost many of his big fights.

 

I have to disagree with you slightly about Page and Thomas, they were better than decent wins.

Greg Page was undefeated and a highly touted prospect at the time and Berbick beat him handily.

Thomas had been undefeated for 7 or 8 years, and was considered best Heavyweight in the world at that time when Berbick beat him.

 

Some conveniently forget that Tyson didn’t become lineal heavyweight champ until the second half of 1988. So he was the true heavyweight champion for about half of ‘88 and all of ‘89. So 1 1/2 years of that decade.

Larry Holmes was heavyweight champion for all of 1980, ‘81, ‘82, ‘83, ‘84 and 3/4ths of ‘85.

Larry was the heavyweight of the 1980s.

I get it. He was exciting. He’s your boy. But 18 months is not even close 5 3/4s years.

 

Thank you. You always prove my point!!

 

Some forget that Tyson was the best fighter in the world for 1987, 1988 & 1989, something Holmes never procured.

 

I think Tyson's reign in the 80s was better than Holmes's reign in the 80s personally and I like Holmes more than Tyson.

Tyson actually unified and cleaned up the division something which Holmes didn't do and that goes against him a bit for me.

 

It was only an upset win, my guy.

 

Well Holmes wanted to dictate who he fought on his own terms and I don't disagree with him. But Holmes also faced guys that should've been nowhere near the ring come fight night.

Tyson's guys never had to pay to get an unworthy opponent a title shot. He swept through the division leaving no stone left unturned, and like someone above posted he fought everyone in Ring's Top 10 from 1986 sans Witherspoon, who lost to Bonecrusher.

So there's that. And I do agree wholeheartedly with your post.

 

I still maintain the Page win was a decent win because Page has not yet become the complete package or a champion at the time Berbick beat him. He was fairly green.

You're right, the Thomas fight was a very good win. I withdraw the labeling of decent for that fight.