Who ranks higher historically? Wlad or Mike Tyson

[gilgamesh]

This kinda came up by accident in a post I made in the Fight by Fight: Tyson Fury thread.

Who would people rank higher historically? Wlad or Mike Tyson?

[DrDuke]

Tyson's best wins were Spinks, Tucker, Bonecrusher, Thomas, Bruno 2X, Ruddock 2X, Berbick, old Holmes, declined Tubbs, declined Golota, declined Carl Williams.

Wlad's best wins were Povetkin, Byrd 2X, Haye, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Pulev, Sam Peter 2X, old Mercer, declined Brewster, declined Rahman, declined Schulz.

It's fair to say, that both were kings of the lesser eras, in which both were the only ATGs in prime, although Wlad didn't clean up the division completely, like Tyson had done in the 80s, since there was Vitali. When Tyson's competition became stronger, he lost, the same with Wlad, while Klit also had some troubles on the way to the top.

So, Tyson edges for me.

Head-to-head, I'd also pick Tyson. Wlad would be enough opened and too chinny for the thunderous puncher like Mike.

[HomicideHenry]

Had it been anyone else who defeated the type of man that Mike Tyson defeated back in the 1980s I don't think nobody would have really cared because quite frankly the 1980s was a rather weak era in heavyweight history. What made Tyson stand out was the way he defeated those men.

The same argument can be made for Vladimir Klitschko. He also fought in a comparatively weak era in heavyweight history. And while he wasn't blasting people away like Mike Tyson it can be said that there wasn't anyone during his reign who was able to win a single round against Vladimir Klitschko. Or at least nobody comes to my mind that ever did.

Both men lost to people that they shouldn't have. Klitschko's embarrassing losses came when he was younger and more raw. Tyson's embarrassing losses came in the 1990s and beyond when he became more of a headhunter than an all-around boxer after the upset loss to Buster Douglas.

Both men had the potential to be top 10 all-time great heavyweights and I'm sure that both men or either one does appear on different people's lists but I think generally the consensus is they are just outside the top 10.

The major primary difference between Mike Tyson and Vladimir Klitschko is that once Mike Tyson unified the heavyweight titles he did not have a long reign as champion. Vladimir Klitschko on the other hand had a title run comparable to Larry Holmes or Joe Louis. Mike Tyson lost all discipline and desire to be heavyweight champion of the world whereas Vladimir Klitschko took it upon himself to be the main ambassador of the sport as heavyweight champion consistently staying in shape and taking opponents seriously even if they were subpar.

The fact that Vladimir Klitschko worked out all the kinks and essentially rebuilt himself under the tutelage of Emmanuel Stewart while Mike Tyson never was able to quite capture his former glory, in my view is probably the most impressive thing about the giant Ukrainian.

For a long time the critics always maintained his brother Vitali was the better of the two but in my view Vladimir was able to get out of his brother's shadow and proved that he was essentially the better brother in terms of boxing. Only age and an incredibly awkward 6 ft 9 switch hitter was able to knock Klitschko off his pedestal.

Historically Mike Tyson will go down always as the most popular event in boxing history. But on the basis of the opponents he defeated and his short title reign combined with the fact that he was not the same Mike Tyson in the 90s or early 2000s, never quite recapturing the magic that he once had, I would have to say that Vladimir Klitschko edges him out in terms of overall worth.

As far as a hypothetical head-to-head matchup is concerned it's very difficult for me to see Mike Tyson being able to do much with the 6 foot 6 or 6 foot 7 Vladimir Klitschko who was pretty capable of neutralizing opponents with his long-range accurate battering ram jab, ring IQ, conditioning, and ability to tie opponents up seemingly at will.

It must be noted that Mike Tyson himself is on film saying that the Klitschko brothers were a lot better than people ever wanted to give them credit for and that he was not at all sure that he could have ever beaten either one of them. Not that that means anything but considering Mike Tyson always styled himself as a historian of the sport I think he would probably know better than the critics who would automatically dismiss the Klitschko brothers as mere cannon fodder for Mike Tyson.

[gilgamesh]

My pick is Wlad. For me it's not a difficult pick, and here is a list of reasons why.

Wladimir had 18 title defenses in his 2nd reign when he was considered the Legitimate World Heavyweight Champion, and 5 title defenses of his WBO Crown which he held in the early 2000's.

That's 23 successful title defenses to his credit over 2 reigns.

Mike Tyson only had 16 title fights total, and he lost 4 of them.

It's universally agreed upon that Wladimir's kryptonite was his chin. Yet Mike Tyson was knocked out once more than Wlad was in spite of having 13 less total fights than Wlad. Nobody has ever questioned Tyson's chin.

Wladimir Klitschko has 53 Knockout wins. Mike Tyson only has 50 wins Total. So Wlad has more KO wins than Mike Tyson has wins.

By every single measure of success. Wladimir is ahead of Mike Tyson.

Wladimir IS better than Mike Tyson, and I think it's time we all start recognizing him for it.

[DrDuke]

My pick is Wlad. For me it's not a difficult pick, and here is a list of reasons why.

Wladimir had 18 title defenses in his 2nd reign when he was considered the Legitimate World Heavyweight Champion, and 5 title defenses of his WBO Crown which he held in the early 2000's.

That's 23 successful title defenses to his credit over 2 reigns.

Mike Tyson only had 16 title fights total, and he lost 4 of them.

It's universally agreed upon that Wladimir's kryptonite was his chin. Yet Mike Tyson was knocked out once more than Wlad was in spite of having 13 less total fights than Wlad. Nobody has ever questioned Tyson's chin.

Wladimir Klitschko has 53 Knockout wins. Mike Tyson only has 50 wins Total. So Wlad has more KO wins than Mike Tyson has wins.

By every single measure of success. Wladimir is ahead of Mike Tyson.

Wladimir IS better than Mike Tyson, and I think it's time we all start recognizing him for it.

Very misleading numbers. The story about chin is total joke.

Wlad's first WBO reign isn't important, since in the early 2000s still wasn't a major belt. It became by the mid 00s.

[Ambling Alp II]

Numbers can easily be inflated in boxing. you can always find an opponent to beat. The sheer amount of titles defenses means nothing.

Klitschko was stopped by three fighters who were not even ranked. That alone eliminates Klitschko.
Name one great heavyweight who this happened to.

Tyson also beat better opponents. It's not even close.

Head to head, Klitschko would be lucky to get out of the 1st round.

[Seamus]

Tyson could probably stop pre-Steward, Wlad in 2 rounds. Wlad with Steward could well make Tyson quit or get DQ'd. And while we're on the subject, since I don't follow boxing like I use to, I only recently learned, that contrary to what some posters claimed, something really was seriously wrong with Wlad in the 1st Brewster fight. A well conditioned athlete dominating a fight doesn't just suddenly look like an obese man who tried to sprint up a flight of stairs.

[gilgamesh]

My pick is Wlad. For me it's not a difficult pick, and here is a list of reasons why.

Wladimir had 18 title defenses in his 2nd reign when he was considered the Legitimate World Heavyweight Champion, and 5 title defenses of his WBO Crown which he held in the early 2000's.

That's 23 successful title defenses to his credit over 2 reigns.

Mike Tyson only had 16 title fights total, and he lost 4 of them.

It's universally agreed upon that Wladimir's kryptonite was his chin. Yet Mike Tyson was knocked out once more than Wlad was in spite of having 13 less total fights than Wlad. Nobody has ever questioned Tyson's chin.

Wladimir Klitschko has 53 Knockout wins. Mike Tyson only has 50 wins Total. So Wlad has more KO wins than Mike Tyson has wins.

By every single measure of success. Wladimir is ahead of Mike Tyson.

Wladimir IS better than Mike Tyson, and I think it's time we all start recognizing him for it.

Very misleading numbers. The story about chin is total joke.

Wlad's first WBO reign isn't important, since in the early 2000s still wasn't a major belt. It became by the mid 00s.

I agree about the WBO Reign personally, but I know some people would count it.

Even without that WBO reign he has more successful title defenses than Mike has title fights at all.

The numbers aren't misleading at all. They just are what they are. Their level of competition was basically the same.

[gilgamesh]

Numbers can easily be inflated in boxing. you can always find an opponent to beat. The sheer amount of titles defenses means nothing.

Klitschko was stopped by three fighters who were not even ranked. That alone eliminates Klitschko.
Name one great heavyweight who this happened to.

Tyson also beat better opponents. It's not even close.

Head to head, Klitschko would be lucky to get out of the 1st round.

No he didn't. His best wins are Ruddock, Michael Spinks, Tucker and Old Holmes.

Wlad has wins that are every bit as good as any of those.

Wlad was stopped by fighters that weren't even ranked....uh huh.

And Tyson lost to the biggest underdog in the history of Professional Sports. Buster Douglas.

He also lost to Danny Williams and Kevin McBride who....dare I say it? Weren't ranked

[DrDuke]

Numbers can easily be inflated in boxing. you can always find an opponent to beat. The sheer amount of titles defenses means nothing.

Klitschko was stopped by three fighters who were not even ranked. That alone eliminates Klitschko.
Name one great heavyweight who this happened to.

Tyson also beat better opponents. It's not even close.

Head to head, Klitschko would be lucky to get out of the 1st round.

Yeah, the older fighter always kos the modern in the 1st

[DrDuke]

My pick is Wlad. For me it's not a difficult pick, and here is a list of reasons why.

Wladimir had 18 title defenses in his 2nd reign when he was considered the Legitimate World Heavyweight Champion, and 5 title defenses of his WBO Crown which he held in the early 2000's.

That's 23 successful title defenses to his credit over 2 reigns.

Mike Tyson only had 16 title fights total, and he lost 4 of them.

It's universally agreed upon that Wladimir's kryptonite was his chin. Yet Mike Tyson was knocked out once more than Wlad was in spite of having 13 less total fights than Wlad. Nobody has ever questioned Tyson's chin.

Wladimir Klitschko has 53 Knockout wins. Mike Tyson only has 50 wins Total. So Wlad has more KO wins than Mike Tyson has wins.

By every single measure of success. Wladimir is ahead of Mike Tyson.

Wladimir IS better than Mike Tyson, and I think it's time we all start recognizing him for it.

Very misleading numbers. The story about chin is total joke.

Wlad's first WBO reign isn't important, since in the early 2000s still wasn't a major belt. It became by the mid 00s.

I agree about the WBO Reign personally, but I know some people would count it.

Even without that WBO reign he has more successful title defenses than Mike has title fights at all.

The numbers aren't misleading at all. They just are what they are. Their level of competition was basically the same.

In the bigger number of Wlad there are a lot of mediocre names, in quality both Tyson and Klit are about the same. Yet Tyson cleaned up everyone and had lesser losses in prime.

[gilgamesh]

But Wlad had the discipline to make his prime last. When Tyson was shot, and getting beaten up by Danny Williams and Kevin McBride. At that age Wlad was still the Heavyweight Champion of the World. Tyson was long, long, long past his Championship days by the age Wlad finally was dethtroned.

[Ambling Alp II]

Numbers can easily be inflated in boxing. you can always find an opponent to beat. The sheer amount of titles defenses means nothing.

Klitschko was stopped by three fighters who were not even ranked. That alone eliminates Klitschko.
Name one great heavyweight who this happened to.

Tyson also beat better opponents. It's not even close.

Head to head, Klitschko would be lucky to get out of the 1st round.

No he didn't. His best wins are Ruddock, Michael Spinks, Tucker and Old Holmes.

Wlad has wins that are every bit as good as any of those.

Wlad was stopped by fighters that weren't even ranked....uh huh.

And Tyson lost to the biggest underdog in the history of Professional Sports. Buster Douglas.

He also lost to Danny Williams and Kevin McBride who....dare I say it? Weren't ranked

Klitschko doesn't have wins as good as those. You would have already mentioned them if he had. Tyson also beat Pinklon Thomas as well.

If your argument is that when they both very old, that Klitschko was better, fine, go for it. Who cares.

But it's silly to compare Tyson's losses to Danny Williams and Kevin McBride to Klitschko's to Purrity, Sanders, and Brewster when he was in his mid-20s. That is desperation on your part.

[gilgamesh]

Numbers can easily be inflated in boxing. you can always find an opponent to beat. The sheer amount of titles defenses means nothing.

Klitschko was stopped by three fighters who were not even ranked. That alone eliminates Klitschko.
Name one great heavyweight who this happened to.

Tyson also beat better opponents. It's not even close.

Head to head, Klitschko would be lucky to get out of the 1st round.

No he didn't. His best wins are Ruddock, Michael Spinks, Tucker and Old Holmes.

Wlad has wins that are every bit as good as any of those.

Wlad was stopped by fighters that weren't even ranked....uh huh.

And Tyson lost to the biggest underdog in the history of Professional Sports. Buster Douglas.

He also lost to Danny Williams and Kevin McBride who....dare I say it? Weren't ranked

Klitschko doesn't have wins as good as those. You would have already mentioned them if he had. Tyson also beat Pinklon Thomas as well.

If your argument is that when they both very old, that Klitschko was better, fine, go for it. Who cares.

But it's silly to compare Tyson's losses to Danny Williams and Kevin McBride to Klitschko's to Purrity, Sanders, and Brewster when he was in his mid-20s. That is desperation on your part.

Wlad's best wins Byrd and Povetkin are every bit as good as Tyson's best wins. Both are more accomplished as Heavyweights than anybody that Tyson ever beat.

[Riddick Bowie]

My pick is Wlad. For me it's not a difficult pick, and here is a list of reasons why.

Wladimir had 18 title defenses in his 2nd reign when he was considered the Legitimate World Heavyweight Champion, and 5 title defenses of his WBO Crown which he held in the early 2000's.

That's 23 successful title defenses to his credit over 2 reigns.

Mike Tyson only had 16 title fights total, and he lost 4 of them.

It's universally agreed upon that Wladimir's kryptonite was his chin. Yet Mike Tyson was knocked out once more than Wlad was in spite of having 13 less total fights than Wlad. Nobody has ever questioned Tyson's chin.

Wladimir Klitschko has 53 Knockout wins. Mike Tyson only has 50 wins Total. So Wlad has more KO wins than Mike Tyson has wins.

By every single measure of success. Wladimir is ahead of Mike Tyson.

Wladimir IS better than Mike Tyson, and I think it's time we all start recognizing him for it.

So you've given Wlad extra points for winning and defending a belt that didn't even exist when Tyson was champ? I can see you've put a lot of thought into this.

Your ranking of Wlad above Tyson is literally all alphabet soup and record padding fluff. There's no comparison or even sign of understanding of the difference in quality of opposition, yet, unbelievably, you do try to compare chins. 'No one questioned Tyson's chin' because he was down 5 times in 20 years, 3 of those when he was old. Wladimir was down what, 15-20 times? That's why people talk about Wlad's chin.

Your explanation is so embarrassing you should honestly be relieved of your mod rights, it's that bad.

[gilgamesh]

He didn't even need the extra points. That's just gravy.

[Jaywheel]

You're digging your own grave here gil.

[Ezzard]

50-50 on it. Tyson maybe burned a little brighter at the top but Wlad shone as a great fighter for much longer.

[keithmoonhangover]

Gotta be Tyson. Better wins and the emphatic fashion with which he won them.

[elmersalsa]

I will give the great Mike Tyson the edge because of the historical impact he did on the sport of boxing.

We forgot that he won the heavyweight title at 20 years old. That alone was historical.

[HomicideHenry]

I'm not so sure people can argue that Berbick, Tubbs, Smith, Spinks, etc are really that much better than the guys that Klitschko defeated. Never mind the fact that most of those guys were crapping their pants before they ever even tried to fight Mike Tyson. If they are better than the guys Klitschko defeated it is by a small margin.

I think it's pretty much a given that Vladimir Klitschko could have defeated those guys just like Mike Tyson did. I think the only one out of all the guys Mike Tyson fought and beat that would have given Klitschko any problems might have been Tony Tucker. I think people forget that a lot of the alphabet champions of the 1980s were pretty average in terms of worth historically, the only thing consistent about those guys were that they were inconsistent in their performances.

[tiny_acres]

50-50 on it. Tyson maybe burned a little brighter at the top but Wlad shone as a great fighter for much longer.

I think you summed it up best

[gilgamesh]

You're digging your own grave here gil.

I mean, it's not really possible to be wrong on this. It's an opinion, and I've backed up my opinion with lots of evidence.

The evidence you Tyson guys have that he's the superior fighter is....well...there's less of it.

[Ezzard]

I'm not so sure people can argue that Berbick, Tubbs, Smith, Spinks, etc are really that much better than the guys that Klitschko defeated. Never mind the fact that most of those guys were crapping their pants before they ever even tried to fight Mike Tyson. If they are better than the guys Klitschko defeated it is by a small margin.

I think it's pretty much a given that Vladimir Klitschko could have defeated those guys just like Mike Tyson did. I think the only one out of all the guys Mike Tyson fought and beat that would have given Klitschko any problems might have been Tony Tucker. I think people forget that a lot of the alphabet champions of the 1980s were pretty average in terms of worth historically, the only thing consistent about those guys were that they were inconsistent in their performances.

Pretty much agree.

[Seamus]

In most cases, Tyson would score quicker knockouts, but if guys made it past the 6th round, than Wlad would look much better.