Who Do YOU Think The GREATEST Boxer Of All-Time Is?

[optkliluzn]

Im sure there will be many, many different opinions on this one.

But for me it was Iron Mike Tyson, in his prime; before he went to jail.

What do you think?

[armageto]

Sugar Ray Robinson, even though I only saw old fights and highlight clips of him. I don't think Tyson is even the best HW of all time, let alone best fighter of all time. Everyone has their opinion though.....

[Goliath]

Im sure there will be many, many different opinions on this one.

But for me it was Iron Mike Tyson, in his prime; before he went to jail.

What do you think?

Tyson isnt even close to the best ever...


There are so many multi division champions who have defended their titles more times than Tyson ever did. Larry Holmes is a prime example of that at heavyweight.

[NYY2424]

Im sure there will be many, many different opinions on this one.

But for me it was Iron Mike Tyson, in his prime; before he went to jail.

What do you think?

Tyson isnt even close to the best ever...


There are so many multi division champions who have defended their titles more times than Tyson ever did. Larry Holmes is a prime example of that at heavyweight.

in his prime, there was no one better then iron mike... he won fights before he even stepped into the ring!!!

[Big Bad John]

The Parkinsons-ridden Muhammad Ali of the late 1970s would probably do better than a prime Tyson did against Buster Douglas.

[I Feel Fine]

Tyson didn't beat anyone that Holyfield or Lewis couldn't beat. On the contrary, they beat all the common opponents they had with Tyson; sometimes more easily, sometimes not. Mike didn't do anything too extraordinary in the big picture of Heavyweight history.

I would go with Robinson. Not an original choice, not that its supposed to be.

[HomicideHenry]

Sam langford, no question.

[Robinson]

He most likely walked in an age long ago, in far away lands,
and his story has been lost as generations of families become
washed away by those un-relenting waves of time.

The Greatest is hard to determine...

to be Great you must be the master of your era, and the
benchmark for all those thereafter...

[My2Sense]

Tyson didn't beat anyone that Holyfield or Lewis couldn't beat. On the contrary, they beat all the common opponents they had with Tyson; sometimes more easily, sometimes not. Mike didn't do anything too extraordinary in the big picture of Heavyweight history.

Exactly right. Not to mention the fact that Tyson failed to beat all the common opponents he had with those two, plus the obvious fact that he was owned by both of them when he fought them.

Tyson is one of those select group of fighters like Donald Curry and (to a lesser degree) Roy Jones, whose rating is often based on pre-conceived notions of him rather than what he was in his career, which is no way to rate a fighter IMO.

As I said in another thread, Tyson rates on par with fighters like Meldrick Taylor and Fernando Vargas, not with any of the true greats.


And to answer the original question, I throw my vote in with Robinson.

Harry Greb might be a strong candidate as well, but I hesitate to go that far with rating him without having ever seen him.

I also believe a case could be made that Ezzard Charles was the best.

[optkliluzn]

Man these fighters you all mention are great candidates.....but if Tyson wasn't the greatest then do any of you believe he could have been one of the most entertaining fighters? Or is that a negative also?

I dont know too many older fighter I just always here Ali and when I watch his original fights...they dont look good at all! But when I watched Tyson's 17-23ish wins on tv he anhilates people, and I have NEVER seen a fighter always hit that accurately hard?

Any Comments on this? Im just curious about other fighters

[My2Sense]

Man these fighters you all mention are great candidates.....but if Tyson wasn't the greatest then do any of you believe he could have been one of the most entertaining fighters? Or is that a negative also?

I dont know too many older fighter I just always here Ali and when I watch his original fights...they dont look good at all! But when I watched Tyson's 17-23ish wins on tv he anhilates people, and I have NEVER seen a fighter always hit that accurately hard?

Any Comments on this? Im just curious about other fighters

It's possible he was. In fact, that's probably the reason so many people still persist in overrating him.

The basic story of Tyson's career is that he either overpowered you, or else you beat him. If he couldn't KO or intimidate a fighter with his power, he was pretty much at a loss. There was never a "Plan B" with Tyson. That's why he never was (even on his "best" day, whatever that was) and never should be considered a truly great fighter. That's why Tyson right smack dab in his prime was so thoroughly beaten by Buster Douglas, probably the biggest underdog in the entire history of sports, and a fighter that someone like Holyfield or Lennox Lewis could probably beat with one hand tied behind his back (figuratively speaking, of course, though I wouldn't rule out literally as well...). His versatility and resilience were almost nonexistent. Contrast that with Ali, whose ability to adapt and pull out fights was among the very best in boxing history. Both Ali and Tyson were probably fairly equally talented, but its the intangibles that make the difference between a great fighter (and an all time great one, in Ali's case) and just a very good one (as Tyson was).

[elmersalsa]

Henry Armstrong...Between 1937 and 1940, there have not been a better fighter, ever.

[thenalo]

to say tyson wasn't a good fighter is simply stupid. yes i said that, sorry for any of you that disagree. tyson was great. when tyson would fight, he had great speed and power. not to mention he had movement unlike any other heavyweight that i've ever seen.

now unfortunately he's not the greatest. no, he couldn't adapt to different things. but his one and only game plan was great. use good speed with great power behind even greater movement (especially in that weight class).

[Big Bad John]

to say tyson wasn't a good fighter is simply stupid. yes i said that, sorry for any of you that disagree. tyson was great. when tyson would fight, he had great speed and power. not to mention he had movement unlike any other heavyweight that i've ever seen.

now unfortunately he's not the greatest. no, he couldn't adapt to different things. but his one and only game plan was great. use good speed with great power behind even greater movement (especially in that weight class).

You are stupid and wrong. NO ONE is saying that Tyson wasn't a good fighter. He was a very good fighter, nearly even great.

[optkliluzn]

I think the problem with Tyson is that there were not enough great fighters around during his PRIME to compare his skills with....like holyfield, lenox, riddick, but there was Foreman right? did they ever even fight? Tyson was very great against the people he fought but no other real threats were out there. OR am I wrong? You tell me

[Big Bad John]

Even a mediocre fighter like Buster Douglas could beat Tyson. And it's not like Evander Holyfield hadn't been around.

[Auzzie001]

I think Willie Pep is probably one of the best BOXERS of all time but Sugar Ray Robinson is deffinatly the greatest FIGHTER of all time..

[Big Bad John]

If Pep was so good, what about Chalky Wright and Sandy Saddler?

[I Feel Fine]

I agree that its hard to say who the best is considering we don't have many fighters, like Greb, on film. You could also say the same for Robinson; we only have only a bit of footage of him as a Welterweight when he was at his best.

I dont know too many older fighter I just always here Ali and when I watch his original fights...they dont look good at all! But when I watched Tyson's 17-23ish wins on tv he anhilates people, and I have NEVER seen a fighter always hit that accurately hard?

Ali fought better fighters. Give Ali Tyson's opposition and Ali could be champion for two or three times as long as Tyson was. Give Tyson Ali's opposition and he'd have a tough enough time getting past Liston, let alone having to fight Frazier and Foreman and Quarry and Lyle and Shavers etc. in his 30s.

The problem novice boxing fans have is understanding that punching power isn't everything in boxing, Liston and Foreman at their best had early KO's in most of their fights while Ali was beating people by decisions and late TKO's; it didn't save them from getting beaten by him. The other problem they have is understanding that close competitive wins over great fighters is more impressive than early blowouts over crappy fighters. I'll take Emile Griffith winning and losing close split decisions over great fighters throughout his career over fifty of Tyson's 30 second KO's of Marvis Frazier.

[Lackeos]

I agree that its hard to say who the best is considering we don't have many fighters, like Greb, on film. You could also say the same for Robinson; we only have only a bit of footage of him as a Welterweight when he was at his best.

I dont know too many older fighter I just always here Ali and when I watch his original fights...they dont look good at all! But when I watched Tyson's 17-23ish wins on tv he anhilates people, and I have NEVER seen a fighter always hit that accurately hard?

Ali fought better fighters. Give Ali Tyson's opposition and Ali could be champion for two or three times as long as Tyson was. Give Tyson Ali's opposition and he'd have a tough enough time getting past Liston, let alone having to fight Frazier and Foreman and Quarry and Lyle and Shavers etc. in his 30s.

The problem novice boxing fans have is understanding that punching power isn't everything in boxing, Liston and Foreman at their best had early KO's in most of their fights while Ali was beating people by decisions and late TKO's; it didn't save them from getting beaten by him. The other problem they have is understanding that close competitive wins over great fighters is more impressive than early blowouts over crappy fighters. I'll take Emile Griffith winning and losing close split decisions over great fighters throughout his career over fifty of Tyson's 30 second KO's of Marvis Frazier.

Ali did say that Tyson was better than him. Take that for what it's worth.

[theone]

1. Ali
2.Robinson
3.Armstrong
4.Greb

You can really mix these four in any order and I wont argue. In my humble opinion they constitute the greatest 4 of all time.

[TheOneIsHere2008]

I agree that its hard to say who the best is considering we don't have many fighters, like Greb, on film. You could also say the same for Robinson; we only have only a bit of footage of him as a Welterweight when he was at his best.

I dont know too many older fighter I just always here Ali and when I watch his original fights...they dont look good at all! But when I watched Tyson's 17-23ish wins on tv he anhilates people, and I have NEVER seen a fighter always hit that accurately hard?

Ali fought better fighters. Give Ali Tyson's opposition and Ali could be champion for two or three times as long as Tyson was. Give Tyson Ali's opposition and he'd have a tough enough time getting past Liston, let alone having to fight Frazier and Foreman and Quarry and Lyle and Shavers etc. in his 30s.

The problem novice boxing fans have is understanding that punching power isn't everything in boxing, Liston and Foreman at their best had early KO's in most of their fights while Ali was beating people by decisions and late TKO's; it didn't save them from getting beaten by him. The other problem they have is understanding that close competitive wins over great fighters is more impressive than early blowouts over crappy fighters. I'll take Emile Griffith winning and losing close split decisions over great fighters throughout his career over fifty of Tyson's 30 second KO's of Marvis Frazier.

Ali did say that Tyson was better than him. Take that for what it's worth.

When Ali said it he was already a middle age man with Parkinson's Syndrome...He was trying to be gracious....

A twenty four year old Muhammad Ali would not have got beat by James Douglas... A thirty and thirty one year old Muhammad Ali would have figured out a way to beat a thirty four and thirty five year old Evander Holyfield

Tyson had four big fights in his career-Berbick, Holyfield, Holyfield, and Lewis...He lost three of them and never avenged them...

I could go on...

[TheOneIsHere2008]

I think the problem with Tyson is that there were not enough great fighters around during his PRIME to compare his skills with....like holyfield, lenox, riddick, but there was Foreman right? did they ever even fight? Tyson was very great against the people he fought but no other real threats were out there. OR am I wrong? You tell me

Do you mean Buster Douglas, Evander Holyfield, and Lenox Lewis?

I won't bring up Danny Williams and Kevin McBride but I do believe the thoroughly shot Muhammad Ali (with Parkinson's Syndrome) who lost a decision to Trevor Berbick in 1981 could beat them...I also think the 52 year old Holmes who beat Butterbean could have beat them...

Tyson's lucky there weren't more great fighters around or he would have been exposer earlier and more often...I doubt he gets past Frazier and Foreman also...I think he beats Norton because Norton got owned by pressure fighters... I also think he beats Shavers because of his lack of movement...

Oh, Ring Magazine had Mike Tyson rated at the 72nd greatest fighter of the last eighty years...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_Magaz ... t_80_Years


When I rate fighters, basketball players, football players, et cetera... I rate them for peak value and career value...Using that criteria , imho, Muhammad Ali was The Greatest...

[Minotauro]

Greatest ever p4p would have to be:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Sam Langford
4. Harry Greb
5. Ezzard Charles

[BoxBuzz]

If Pep was so good, what about Chalky Wright and Sandy Saddler?

Hey what happened to your IQ? It just dropped to room temp with that statement. At least in terms of direct co-relationships. Either that or you have to go back and argue that Douglas was better than Tyson and Tarver better than Jones...maybe Ruiz better than Holyfield.

You sir will need to aim more accurately in the future or leave your gun unloaded and at the door when you pass through our rod iron, ivy covered gates. Oh and no sawed off shotguns on the premises.

Insurance rates are high enough as it is.