Who did Mike Tyson actually beat ?

[jessi]

Mikes career was split into two halfs, some say before the Douglas loss and after, and some say before his jail sentence and after, for me Tyson's peak was also very short and very early, I'd say between 19 and 22 years old. But when you actually look at his record who did he really beat ? Berbick was a poor world champion, James smith and Tony Tucker were hardly great, spinks and Holmes were old and past it, he ducked Holyfield in 91/92, he didn't want Lennox as a sparring partner anymore as lewis kept jabbing his head off, he beat Bruno twice ( wow ), lost to Douglas, Williams, and mcbride to name a few.
He was awesome and feared in his short prime but who was he really fighting ?

[tommo100]

you can only beat what is put in front of you and tyson demolished most of them
incidentally tony tucker was giving him fits until he broke his hand in the 4th,after that it was all holding and survival for him

[palooka]

The heavyweight division was a bollocks after Holmes lost to Spinks. Tyson went through all the old guard and looked like he enjoyed it too. All the men he beat after becoming hamp would have been in todays top 10.

Tyson (or someone very much like him) was badly needed in the mid 1980's (I can remember).

He went off the rails in a big way and I don't think he'dve been champ against some of the very big, athletic men but all things considered; he did boxing a big favour, and beat some good men.

[Yes We Can]

Wins against Bruno, Ruddock and Spinks alone make for a solid resume if unspectacular.

All 3 would be Champions/beltholders with ease in todays market

[loaded_gloves]

Oh God, do we really have to go down this road again? Its become so fashionable to bash legends.

Trevor Berbick, Bonecrusher Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, Tony Tubbs, Michael Spinks, Frank Bruno twice, Carl Williams, Razor Ruddock twice, Bruce Seldon, and Andrew Golota. All world class guys, all on their night very dangerous men.

Good fights for any world champ in history.

I don't like Tyson but to dismiss that opposition is ridiculous. If you know all those guys individual tales, the majority of them had an incredible amateur pedigree without headguards and as boys fighting men from the Soviet Bloc, they all had decorated pro careers then ran into Tyson. He was clearly special, as were Douglas and Holyfield.

[Terminator666]

Holmes is probably his best win. Larry was 38 which dosen't seem mega old for a heavy these days.

[Mensa07]

Don't look at records, watch fights!

[Twinkle Toes]

I watched the Tyson documentary the other night, was kinda interesting, but didn't really offer anything new.

I don't think his Resume is outstanding, but when he did win, he usually won in style.

[jamesmcdonnell]

His resume may not be oustanding, but it is the manner of his wins which marks him out. I don't rate Tyson as high, or as low, as some. However, he destroyed Berbick, Tubbs and Thomas, who were at the top of the tree. He flattened Holmes, who despite being rusty had a grade A chin, and amazing powers of recovery. He turned Bonecrusher smith into a cringing coward, and won almost every round against Tucker, hand or not.

I have no doubt, that on his best night, Tyson would have troubled ANY heavyweight in history. I'd have picked Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Liston to have beaten him, but with ease....no way. Tyson on one of his worst nights, still almost turned the fight around against Douglas, who fought the best fight of his life.

Tyson's big weakness was that against men who werent intimidated, tended to shrink, but even then he was dangerous. Holyfield, great as he was, fought real dirty against Tyson in both fights, and was allowed to get away with it because of Tyson's rep. Oh I'd have also picked Vitali to beat him, due to rock hard chin, and totally iron will. However, Wlad, would have been intimidated, and Lewis had he fought a younger, faster and more 'into it' Tyson, I think would have ended the fight being rescued by the ref.

Tyson deserves his due, not the greatest reign ever, but by god did he turn in some incredibly destructive performances. His win over Spinks showed Tyson at his best, he totally terrified him as he entered the ring, and destroyed him with his aura as much as his other assets.

[Quixall]

Mike will be remembered for his impact on boxing, not for his tenure as world champion. What you have to remember about Tyson is that he was small for a heavyweight and did very well in that regard. Tyson didn't have any stand out fights against real elite quality but that is because people judge him against his fights with Holyfield and Lewis. Fighters like Berbick, Thomas, Williams, tubbs were no push overs but Tyson made them look inferior so he never got his just rewards for beating those guys.

Tyson's prime was very short, from 19 to 23 years of age and after the defeat to Douglas and the prison sentence he was never the same fighter. His lifestyle took it's toll, losing his mentor didn't help matters and when Kevin Rooney left his training and fighting style went to the dogs. The wrong guys got involved in running his career and the rest is history. As someone said earlier, a lot of the guys Tyson fought pre prison would have been classed as elite heavyweight fighters in todays era.

[Quixall]

Larry Holmes
Michael Spinks

Holmes hadnt fought for 2 or 3 years, was out of shape and was 38 years of age. Spinks was a blown up light heavyweight who only shone against slower ageing heavyweights.

[rob h]

I also wouldnt count the Williams and McBride fights. Mike was tehre for the money.

The way he went through these men was awesome, ferocious. And as somebody as said ity is easy to write these guys off 2o years later, but each one would be top 10 or even a belt holder in todays HW division.

[DavidPayne]

I know, between 1985 and the Lewis fight, a period of supposed austerity in the heavyweight ranks he didn't fight Morrison, Foreman, Witherspoon, Moorer, Bowe, Mercer, V. Klitschko, Tua, Byrd, Lewis, McCall, Briggs. Basically anyone with a punch and/or a chin and some bollacks. Some because they lost at crucial times but nevertheless when some of those fights were out there Tyson was either inside or fighting Savarese, Bruno, Norris, Etienne, McNeeley, Nielsen, Selden, Francis,

When faced with a guy who didn't crumble Tyson very swiftly ran out of ideas. He took his beatings; had a good chin and was a phenomenon who would have caused all of the above massive problems and likely beaten several of them.

Holyfield would always have his number aged 17 or 57.

But his resume lacks depth for all the retrospective credibility afforded the likes of Bruno - who is now canonised because he would have been a top 3 heavyweight in the currently bleak landscape - which is a bit like saying how good a leader of the Labour party Michael Foot was.

[stujones]

Tyson would have had a least a punchers chance against anyone (including Holyfield).....sure, reading the history between the two you have to say Holyfield had his number mentally. However, I think it is also important to remember the age of Tyson and maturity (physically and mentally) when Holyfield had that massive mental edge in the amateurs. The period after that untill 1992 both guys changed quite a bit. Tyson became "iron mike" and Holyfield originally struggled to become a fully fledged heavyweight. I think the Holyfield who got hurt against Bert Cooper and struggled (for a bit) against Michael Dokes wasn't as strong a fighter (better in other respects though) as the fully fledged heavyweight that faced Tyson in 1996. If there was any period in their lifespan that Tyson could have beaten Holyfield then it was between 1988-1992 - and that is as much to do with Holyfield as it was Tyson. I'm quite surprised the OP thought Tyson ducked Holyfield in 1991/1992 - did he rape Desree Washington to get out of the fight? It was signed, it was on.

[fasteddie]

Mikes career was split into two halfs, some say before the Douglas loss and after, and some say before his jail sentence and after, for me Tyson's peak was also very short and very early, I'd say between 19 and 22 years old. But when you actually look at his record who did he really beat ? Berbick was a poor world champion, James smith and Tony Tucker were hardly great, spinks and Holmes were old and past it, he ducked Holyfield in 91/92, he didn't want Lennox as a sparring partner anymore as lewis kept jabbing his head off, he beat Bruno twice ( wow ), lost to Douglas, Williams, and mcbride to name a few.
He was awesome and feared in his short prime but who was he really fighting ?

i was a massive tyson fan in the late 80's early 90's but after growing up abit and knowing more about boxing i also ask myself this same question. imo the heavyweight division back then was poorer than what it is now,the thing that made tyson look brilliant was his youth explosiveness plus a load of tomato cans who would of fell over in a strong wind.

[Ezzard]

Some of the stuff talked about concerning Tyson is nonsense but you can’t dismiss his impact on the sport and the way he cleaned up the division.

Those 1980s guys were inconsistent, often fat and, by the time Tyson got to them, most had seen better days. But they were all solid contenders. He brought excitement and certainty to the division.

He was found wanting when things went against him in the ring but he would always be a live man in any fight. Holyfield was simply the better man.

[fasteddie]

until the 90's he was untouchable and could mix it but after rooney had beeen sacked and the yes men came in tyson started to shy away from the hard training so he was his own destruction,there was no one around for him to fight but he gave us all good memories,the razor ruddock fights, the spinx fight,the douglas fight,the mitch green fight after the one in the ring haha tyson will go down as a great heavy because of the impact he had and the rise at such a young age. even his agression inspired young kids to take up boxing.

[milpool]

This debate will rage on for years. For what it's worth, my opinion is that the heavyweight scene in the late 80's was far better than it is today. Nothing spectacular but today we have some people bigging up Tyson Fury as if he is the next big thing...transport him back to the late 80's and he'd get schooled by Pinklon Thomas, Bonecrusher Smith, Tyrell Biggs, Frank Bruno etc...
Tyson was an animal in his prime and we'd all love to see someone of his ilk tear up today's poor heavyweight division.
Was he as good as we first thought? Probably not. But for a long while he was the man.

[flatnoseflynn]

Tyson fights where events, not just fights the guy was AWESOME! in his day. Not many fighters bring that much exictement to boxing without being a bit special! The build up to the Spinks fight was just unbelievable classic stuff.

[Rocky Balboa]

I also wouldnt count the Williams and McBride fights. Mike was tehre for the money.

The way he went through these men was awesome, ferocious. And as somebody as said ity is easy to write these guys off 2o years later, but each one would be top 10 or even a belt holder in todays HW division.

Yes, but Holmes would some four years later, go on to give then champion Evander Holyfield, all he could handle. Holmes may have been past it when he fought Tyson. but there can be no doubt he was even more shot four years later when he fought Evander.

No one, even those who predicted a Tyson win over Spinks, predicted he would go through Spinks as fast as he did. People quickly cite the fact that Spinks was intimidate, and maybe he was, but it was more of a case of Tyson's speed, skill and Power, getting to him early, that was of more significance.

[stujones]

One of Tyson's best wins that often gets overlooked was against Carl the Truth Williams..... I know at the end of his career his chin wasn't great.... but this was a guy who gave a prime (or near prime) Larry Holmes fits, and would give Tim Witherspoon problems later on.

Tyson fought all he had out there.... you ask any American who followed Tyson's career at the time who was the WORST opponent Tyson faced (on paper) between 1986-1990..... I would say most would say Bruno. He was scoffed it, it was considered a mismatch. He got the chance cause he fought a fat Joe Bugner (people forget Joe beat former world champion Greg Page before Bruno).

Bruno would be top 3 in nowadays.... guys like Holmes, Tubbs, etc would carry on and beat fringe contenders in the naughties.

Tubbs even at his fattest would be the Klitchsko's hardest ask now.

[Pat Butcher]

Don't look at records, watch fights!

Indeed

[loaded_gloves]

Christ, in this thread I've read Vitali Klitschko would beat Mike Tyson (Oh, the way Big Bro KOd a fat 40 year old Shannon Briggs, what a beast he is), and the division of today is SUPERIOR to that of the 80s!!

Unfreakinbelievable.

If I owned Boxrec I'd shut down the whole forum rather than allow people like this a platform to spew their insanity.

[keithmoonhangover]

Holmes in 4 rounds.

Spinks in 1 round.

I rest my case.

[fasteddie]

Christ, in this thread I've read Vitali Klitschko would beat Mike Tyson (Oh, the way Big Bro KOd a fat 40 year old Shannon Briggs, what a beast he is), and the division of today is SUPERIOR to that of the 80s!!

Unfreakinbelievable.

If I owned Boxrec I'd shut down the whole forum rather than allow people like this a platform to spew their insanity.

a forum is for people to air their opinions, if you dont like it walk away and dont turn back