Why is Tysons competition poo pooed

Facepalm

 

I don’t think his competition was especially bad nor good.

Despite the HW division being the “glamour” division, it doesn’t seem to be as consistently talented like others (like welterweight). How often do people say a HW era was really strong? It seems like the early to mid 70s and early to mid 90s are the exception, and most eras are described as anywhere ranging from weak to decent.

Tyson beat a lot of titlists/contenders in a short amount of time.

I remember Atlas talking about how he plotted to murder Donny Lalonde. Lalonde was like “WTF is wrong with this guy?”

I mentioned this before, but it’s interesting how Mike Tyson always seems to be involved with these rap/street beefs/crime.

Friends with 2Pac, who got killed after the Seldon fight. Also friends and worked with Jimmy Henchman, the guy who ordered the robbery/shooting on 2Pac in Times Square (when he survived). Friends with Zip Martin, who allegedly supplied the murder weapon to Orlando Anderson/Keefe D when they killed 2Pac in Vegas.

50 Cent claimed he was shot by Hommo, Mike Tyson’s friend, in a song. Hommo gets killed later, and Tyson dedicated the Savarese fight to him in his infamous “eat his children” rant. Hommo was killed likely by World Hardy, who was dating Lil Kim. Some of World’s goons said in court that they heard Tyson put up $50k to have World killed in retaliation for Hommo, and they debated on whether or not to kill Tyson.

 

Brilliant response, I tip my hat off to you.

 

Problem is that Tyson fans want to eat the cake and keeo it when it comes to Tyson's era. They make a big deal of Mike's flagging discipline after Spinks, but at that same time complain that simply stating that the same can be said of most of the best talent of the era (Page, Dokes, Witherspoon, Thomas and Tubbs) is disrespectful to Tyson. And that, taken together, floats like a three day turd.

 

Who keeps a turd floating for three days?

And who regained two heavyweight titles (separate bouts) after a four year layoff? Isn’t that one guy?

 

You only seem to have a problem with Tyson fans, even the ones who make sound arguments like the ones in this thread.

 

Tyson came in and beat that ass for a few years against the best competition that was available.. ignited interest in boxing like no other since Ali and got pasted a few times... who gives a **** what everyone really thinks... its not worth arguing about to the point of getting upset or going back and forth to prove a point...

 

But you do count fighters who admit to using a fake dick to cheat drug tests, but their opponent’s ear off and try to break the arms of inferior opponents rather than just beat them by boxing.

Got it.

 

I have asserted that Holyfield fought a better set of opponents than Mike Tyson.

Now throw out the cruiserweights if you wish (as you did) and … rank them by OPPONENT’S WINNING PERCENTAGE.

That’s the data you’re presenting on their opponents, and Holyfield’s ranks … No. 1.

His opponents won 92% of their fights. Better than 9 out of 10. Damn. That’s even more impressive than I thought.

So he fought a set of fighters who had a higher winning percentage than Ali, not to mention Tyson.

Seems like your data proves my point.

 

Lmao it was pot. There has been no evidence Tyson doped during his prime years.

Tyson vs botha is I assume what you are talking about. Botha has never said Tyson was trying to break his arm, but in the post fight interview admitted to getting Tyson all worked upa with his shenanigans and egging him on.

Did you see the holyfield shenanigans that perpetuated the bite? It was an illegal head butt in the 2nd round that opened up a huge gash over Tysons eye. Tyson had to retaliate. a cut like that could easily cause you to lose a fight. Tyson addressed why in this video:

 

Let’s look at some ways we can compare Tyson and Holyfield:

H2H: Holyfield 2, Tyson 0 (one by KTFO, one by DQ with Holy ahead on all three cards)

***

Heavyweight opponents’ winning percentage (better opposition faced per data supplied by @Sangria — Holyfield 91.9%, Tyson 85.3%

***

Common opponents:

Quick Tillis: Holyfield W by KO, Tyson W by decision

Pinklon Thomas: both W by KO

Lennox Lewis: Holyfield D, L by decision; Tyson L by KO

Buster Douglas: Holyfield W by KO, Tyson L by KO

Brian Nielsen: Holyfield W by KO, Tyson W by KO

Frans Botha: Holyfield W by KO, Tyson W by KO

Lou Savarese: Holyfield W by decision, Tyson W by KO

Alex Stewart: Holyfield W by decision, W by KO; Tyson W by KO

Larry Holmes: Holyfield W by decision, Tyson W by KO

Henry Tillman: Holyfield W by KO (cruiser), Tyson W by KO

***

Best wins

Tyson: Donovon Ruddock x2, Michael Spinks, Tony Tucker, Tyrell Biggs, Pinklon Thomas

Holyfield: Mike Tyson x2, Riddick Bowe, Buster Douglas, Michael Moorer, George Foreman

***

Worst defeats:

Tyson: KO by Buster Douglas (prime), KO by Danny Williams (past prime), KO by Kevin McBride (past prime)

Holyfield: KO by James Toney (past prime), decision by Larry Donald (past prime), decision by John Ruiz (past prime)

***

Seems to me all of these measurements fall in Holyfield’s favor. He beat Tyson twice. He beat better fighters than Tyson did (including Douglas, who beat Tyson), his worst losses are far better than Tyson’s and he fought heavyweight opponents with a better winning percentage than Tyson.

Yes, he fought on well past when he should have and took on more defeats. But if Tyson kept fighting past his last two losses he’d have racked up even more embarrassing defeats than he did.

 

But not much higher than Ali or Tyson. It's his winning % against them that has me worried.

Holyfield's winning percentage against them is only 68.4%. Quite the disparity. A wide gap, so skew the numbers in your favor if you like because his overall % places him at #12, right where I have him ranked with my HW ATG's. Not even in the Top 10 and quite a few spots down from Tyson, I might add.

So my data actually proves my point.

 

The topic of this thread is Tyson’s level of opposition.

I pointed out that Holyfield fought better opposition than Tyson.

Your data underscores that.

And Holy not only beat Tyson (twice), he also beat Buster Douglas, who beat Tyson. And well past prime, he fought Lewis to a draw … and he beat Tyson.

Yes, as I noted, Holyfield fought well past his sell-by date. Tyson’s win percentage would be woeful if he fought as long as Holyfield … he was losing to journeymen by KO while Evander was fighting for titles and losing to champions (or fighting Lewis to a draw).

 

Tyson doesn't get enough credit for unifying the titles one by one. Nobody's done it since. That's the WBC, WBA, IBF and Lineal (although Lineal can be controversial from time to time). And it's almost been 40 years since it happened.

He's the only heavyweight to ever do it. Tyson's also one of only three heavies to regain the championship 10 years after first winning it. The others being Ali and Foreman.

Would be nice to see another Heavyweight Title Unification Tournament...wouldn't it?!

 

Tyson was in prison for 3 years and missed out on regaining his championship from Holyfield. I think even Holy's said he was lucky he fought Tyson when he did.