Who ranks higher historically? Wlad or Mike Tyson

[Ambling Alp II]

His legacy improved because he stacked up one meaningless title defense after another. It got to the point that people began to forget about the embarrassing defeat.
He should be treated like anyone else. Remember when Lennox Lewis got ripped for getting stopped twice in his prime? It was often pointed out that no other hw champion was stopped twice and was considered great.

Well, it happened three times to klitschko.. Against far , far weaker competition.

He was ahead but ran out of gas against Ross Purrity? come on. It counts.
Yes, I have heard the whole "something was wrong with Wald" against Brewster. Come on. You can say that about any fight. Imagine if someone said that about a Tyson loss. We are getting into Crybaby Roberto Duran levels now. The Bewster fight counts.

If you want to argue that Klitschko was better in his late 30s than Tyson was at that age, fine. It doesn't matter.

Are we going to do that all the time. Is Bernard Hopkins the best of all time? Is George Foreman better than Ali? We could go on and on.

We need to rate guys the same way. Not just pulling out something to favor our guy.

Weigh the quality wins against the severity of the losses. Take into consideration the stage of the fighter's career.

[oogiebe]

Lewis' losses weren't beatdowns though, they were one punch bombs, both of which were avenged (although a weeping McCall wasn't very satisfying).

Tyson was a one of a kind, albeit for a brief period. Klit dominated a weak era and had some questionable losses.

Perhaps overall they are too close to call in very different categories of rating a fighter.

[keithmoonhangover]

Lewis' losses weren't beatdowns though, they were one punch bombs, both of which were avenged (although a weeping McCall wasn't very satisfying).

Tyson was a one of a kind, albeit for a brief period. Klit dominated a weak era and had some questionable losses.

Perhaps overall they are too close to call in very different categories of rating a fighter.

Yeah, it's a bit like judging a fight. Some people look at only punches landed. While others, like me, take into account defensive skills, making someone miss etc. Some prefer come forward fighters, some slicksters, some believe the challenger has to take the title.

[Seamus]

Of course Klitschko's losses count, but unlike Tyson he made corrections afterwards.

Not blaming anyone for the Brewster loss, it's just that something very strange happened, Could have been his own fault entirely, but I don't buy the argument it was the punches that suddenly had him looking so exhausted. Sam Peter dropped him 3 times and he didn't look that way.

[gilgamesh]

Wlad lost to Ross Purrity due to a horrendous fight strategy. He ran out of gas against a guy who could take quite a punch. He was way ahead at the time. Against Brewster in the first fight, something really strange happened. SEE Aftermath in Wlad's Wikipedia page. It absolutely looked suspicious to me the way he was suddenly having trouble standing. When they had their rematch Brewster's corner saw enough after 6 rds.

At 41, Klitschko gave Joshua his sternest test at the time. At 38 Tyson quit when he realised he wasn't going to beat Kevin McBride. Wlad never received the kind of acclaim Iron Mike did before his first loss, but as Tyson's legacy tarnished as he aged, Klitschko's actually improved.

Well said. I think even his harshest critics would have to say a well past his best fought bravely in defeat against Anthony Joshua.

More than can be said of Tyson who basically just packed it in at the first sign of adversity against Danny Williams and McBride.

[gilgamesh]

Of course Klitschko's losses count, but unlike Tyson he made corrections afterwards.

Not blaming anyone for the Brewster loss, it's just that something very strange happened, Could have been his own fault entirely, but I don't buy the argument it was the punches that suddenly had him looking so exhausted. Sam Peter dropped him 3 times and he didn't look that way.

He did attack the living the sh*t out of Brewster in those early rounds, and it's possible that when he got a little rattled by a heavy jab in the 1st round it sent his heart racing, and caused him to tire faster.

Not sure.

It was definitely bizarre. You see guys get fatigued in fights, but he just completely hit the wall to the point that he couldn't even stand and sh*t. He never really took any one devastating KO shot from Brewster though I remember.

[DrDuke]

The Klit haters are amusing, their butts will never stop exploding with the fact, that there was such a boring dominant champ. However, let's not overrate him, Tyson was better.

[Ezzard]

The Klit haters are amusing, their butts will never stop exploding with the fact, that there was such a boring dominant champ. However, let's not overrate him, Tyson was better.

It gets very emotional here when anyone mentions them. Weird too that speaking of both or either of them triggers the same response. It's a family thing.

[keithmoonhangover]

Did Wlad ever beat the #1 heavyweight in the division?

And just to be clear, this is just a question, it doesn't mean I'm a 'hater' or a 'fanboy' or a 'casual'.

[DrDuke]

Did Wlad ever beat the #1 heavyweight in the division?

And just to be clear, this is just a question, it doesn't mean I'm a 'hater' or a 'fanboy' or a 'casual'.

Vitali should be #1 after Wlad. Then Povetkin.

[Ambling Alp II]

Of course Klitschko's losses count, but unlike Tyson he made corrections afterwards.

Not blaming anyone for the Brewster loss, it's just that something very strange happened, Could have been his own fault entirely, but I don't buy the argument it was the punches that suddenly had him looking so exhausted. Sam Peter dropped him 3 times and he didn't look that way.

He made corrections? No. He beat a bunch of stiffs.
It's a lame excuse. He was tired, had a weak chin or a combination of both. doesn't matter. He lost to a no name. Again.

[keithmoonhangover]

Did Wlad ever beat the #1 heavyweight in the division?

And just to be clear, this is just a question, it doesn't mean I'm a 'hater' or a 'fanboy' or a 'casual'.

Vitali should be #1 after Wlad. Then Povetkin.

Are you saying Wlad did or didn't fight the #1 in the division?

[DrDuke]

Did Wlad ever beat the #1 heavyweight in the division?

And just to be clear, this is just a question, it doesn't mean I'm a 'hater' or a 'fanboy' or a 'casual'.

Vitali should be #1 after Wlad. Then Povetkin.

Are you saying Wlad did or didn't fight the #1 in the division?

He did after Vitali retired.

[keithmoonhangover]

Vitali should be #1 after Wlad. Then Povetkin.

Are you saying Wlad did or didn't fight the #1 in the division?

He did after Vitali retired.

Who did he fight after Vitali retired that was #1 in the division?

[DrDuke]

Are you saying Wlad did or didn't fight the #1 in the division?

He did after Vitali retired.

Who did he fight after Vitali retired that was #1 in the division?

Oh my, your deduction is too slow...

[keithmoonhangover]

He did after Vitali retired.

Who did he fight after Vitali retired that was #1 in the division?

Oh my, your deduction is too slow...

I am not deducing anything, just mearly asking a question old boy.

[p4p1]

I’ve read it was Klitchsckos blood sugar, 2x the normal amount and not far away from diabetic coma. Not sure if it’s true or not but it’s certainly a reason.

[Ezzard]

Wlad is an ATG heavyweight. Some might think he's overrated, some underrated. But to argue he's not a great is churlish.

[keithmoonhangover]

Wlad is an ATG heavyweight. Some might think he's overrated, some underrated. But to argue he's not a great is churlish.

Definitely an ATG, but not in the higher echelons IMO. He's not up there with Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Ali, Holmes, Tyson and Lewis.

[tiny_acres]

I’ve read it was Klitchsckos blood sugar, 2x the normal amount and not far away from diabetic coma. Not sure if it’s true or not but it’s certainly a reason.

If anything it would of had to of been too low. I'm diabetic and have had blood sugar as high as over 500. The normal is around 100.
Now when my blood sugar drops below 60 I can barely stand, sweats, disoriented and you could knock me over by just a slight push.
I do not see an athlete of Wlad's shape ever getting his blood sugar so high that he would have these type of issues. I could see it dropping too low though

[Ezzard]

Wlad is an ATG heavyweight. Some might think he's overrated, some underrated. But to argue he's not a great is churlish.

Definitely an ATG, but not in the higher echelons IMO. He's not up there with Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Ali, Holmes, Tyson and Lewis.

Fair play, mate.

I think it's an amazing story that he managed to come back from devastating defeats and then go on to dominate a division as he did. Very few boxers could have done that.

I would have Wlad and Mike at a similar level.

[Ambling Alp II]

He "came back" fighting terrible competition. Usally wasn't impressive in doing so. Why is that so amazing?

Name one other ATG heavyweight that was stopped by three different non top 10 fighters in his 20s.
I can't come up with one.

It's not being churlish to argue that he was not an ATG heavyweight. ATG heavyweights have much more impressive victims lists and less embarrassing defeats. It's pretty much that simple.

It's not that doesn't have a weak case. He has no case at all.

[DrDuke]

He "came back" fighting terrible competition. Usally wasn't impressive in doing so. Why is that so amazing?

Name one other ATG heavyweight that was stopped by three different non top 10 fighters in his 20s.
I can't come up with one.

It's not being churlish to argue that he was not an ATG heavyweight. ATG heavyweights have much more impressive victims lists and less embarrassing defeats. It's pretty much that simple.

It's not that doesn't have a weak case. He has no case at all.

Has Klit once pissed in your soup, so that you are willing to copy-paste the same after every new unbiased comment on the subject?

[HomicideHenry]

He "came back" fighting terrible competition. Usally wasn't impressive in doing so. Why is that so amazing?

Name one other ATG heavyweight that was stopped by three different non top 10 fighters in his 20s.
I can't come up with one.

It's not being churlish to argue that he was not an ATG heavyweight. ATG heavyweights have much more impressive victims lists and less embarrassing defeats. It's pretty much that simple.

It's not that doesn't have a weak case. He has no case at all.

While not the heavyweight division, I'm fairly sure that Billy Conn lost an awful lot of fights early on in his career. Still he's considered one of the top five light heavyweights of all time. There's a lot of good or great fighters from various weight classes that had embarrassing losses early on in their career, or even in the middle of their career.

The fact that Klitschko avenged the loss to Brewster and completely blew out Peter in their return match, goes to show there was a big improvement from the younger version. To dismiss or minimize this fact, is to not see Klitschko at all.

When analyzing a fighter for all time great top 10 ratings one has to look at the entirety of their career rather than focus on certain parts of their career. It seems to me that you guys focus on Mike Tyson's title reign and essentially disregard everything else.

[Tony1244]

I hate these questions because they're so tough to answer. Either one could KO the other. I'd go with Tyson, I think.