Tyson

[Controversial]

Mike dominated all the top contenders at Heavyweight, he went through the division, destroying everyone in a way that very, very few men have ever done. To do that in any weight class is great but to do it against the biggest and strongest division is an amazing achievement.... Then when he returned, he won a World Championship belt again. None of that is "marketing" or "hype" - it's just giving the man the credit that he is due...

Crazy to think he was only a few months past his 20th birthday when he beat Berbick and 21 when he became undisputed HW champ.

He wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

Tucker for the three belts (WBA, WBC and IBF), Tyson was declared undisputed HW champ when the result was announced. Spinks for the lineal

[Tony1244]

I mean the easiest way to market a fighter is if he's knocking people out in exciting fashion. Mike Tyson did that.

He's certainly an example of having a great manager that steered his career just right in the early going to make him look invincible.

I've always found it amusing that Mike is barely a Top 10 all time Heavyweight, and maybe not even quite in the Top 10 at all at Heavy, but he is without question one of the Top 3 or 4 biggest celebrities the sport has ever produced.

He's not as good as Holyfield or Lennox Lewis who both beat him, yet I'd bet you that for every person that knows who Holyfield and Lennox are. There's 100 more that know who Mike Tyson is.

Life's funny that way sometimes.

Agree with everything other than it's possible he could have bested Lewis and Holyfield in his early going IF he had steered clear of all the womanizing, drugs, and alcohol. But IF my aunt had balls......

[gilgamesh]

I mean the easiest way to market a fighter is if he's knocking people out in exciting fashion. Mike Tyson did that.

He's certainly an example of having a great manager that steered his career just right in the early going to make him look invincible.

I've always found it amusing that Mike is barely a Top 10 all time Heavyweight, and maybe not even quite in the Top 10 at all at Heavy, but he is without question one of the Top 3 or 4 biggest celebrities the sport has ever produced.

He's not as good as Holyfield or Lennox Lewis who both beat him, yet I'd bet you that for every person that knows who Holyfield and Lennox are. There's 100 more that know who Mike Tyson is.

Life's funny that way sometimes.

Agree with everything other than it's possible he could have bested Lewis and Holyfield in his early going IF he had steered clear of all the womanizing, drugs, and alcohol. But IF my aunt had balls......

I can see Mike Tyson beating Lennox Lewis if he had caught him early on his Pro career before giving him the chance to get much experience.

I don't think there was ever a time in their careers that Mike Tyson could've beaten Holyfield, and I don't think he'd beat him if they fought tomorrow either.

[Controversial]

How much “help” did Holyfield have as a HW that made beating Tyson possible? I think a lot of people believe he wasn’t natural based on his bulked up HW physique, his amazing powers of recovery and superb conditioning, how much a factor was that against Mike?

[jimglen]

People see him like a Demigod of boxing but in reality he was just one hyped fighter. He fought in a weak era , went 12 rounds against guys like Tillis, Green, Smith and Tucker who I think is Tyson's best win. When he faced better competition, he got knocked out. And his fanboys should stop with that past-prime schit . Dude was a young full of juice mofo when he got knocked out by Buster and when he got stopped by Holyfield. So many gullible people are so nostalgic and emotional about a very hyped fighter. Lennox, Holy, Bowe, Tua, Ike were the real deals. This man is being too much arse kissed mostly because of his hyped aura.

His handlers knew how "good" he is, so they avoided an immediate big money rematch with Buster. Pretty sure that they had a big rematch clause in that contract. They fed him with more stiffs to put him back in the hype-train and then cash in vs Holyfield. Man, Don King was a big marketing genius.

Ah, No!

Iron Mike was for real,

now if you want to talk Sideshow, an Invested Commodity, and a Package soley for entertainment renumerations, guarded & protected in a Sub Par Division, S-HW, a 2cd rate fighter at Best, then look no further than the 'other' Tyson - Fury.

[apollo creed]

Like I said, Tyson was a very well marketed fighter that he was careful matched against some over the hill/accessible/paper champions to get those straps. When he stepped up in competition he got stopped by a top contender in Douglas. These are the facts. Its crazy and very biased in a nostalgic way to say that a 40 y/o past-prime Holmes, a bloated up lhw Spinks and Tucker were some quality wins worthy of a HOF hw fighter. Yeah, if Mike would've avenged next his loss vs Buster and beat Holy then I'd have said that he was great.

Name one quality HOF worthy win of Tyson that is equally or even better than the best wins of Holy, Bowe, Lewis and even Ike??

btw Mike was still a young fighter when Holy, Lennox, Bowe, Ike and Tua were competing.

[apollo creed]

88 Foreman would've stopped 88 Tyson, period! Foreman was too damn strong and gritty.

[jwfg]

Crazy to think he was only a few months past his 20th birthday when he beat Berbick and 21 when he became undisputed HW champ.

He wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

Tucker for the three belts (WBA, WBC and IBF), Tyson was declared undisputed HW champ when the result was announced. Spinks for the lineal

I think you need to get the dictionary out and look up the word, undisputed. That term has been around a lot longer than the belts. When there is no dispute, someone is not undisputed. Spinks had a claim to the heavyweight championship, which was well known going into the fight and therefore, Tyson wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

[Controversial]

He wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

Tucker for the three belts (WBA, WBC and IBF), Tyson was declared undisputed HW champ when the result was announced. Spinks for the lineal

I think you need to get the dictionary out and look up the word, undisputed. That term has been around a lot longer than the belts. When there is no dispute, someone is not undisputed. Spinks had a claim to the heavyweight championship, which was well known going into the fight and therefore, Tyson wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

I know what undisputed means thanks. Lineal means little in my book, if Spinks never fought Tyson and retired then what? No one can ever claim undisputed ever again, utter nonsense.

[soul_survivor]

People see him like a Demigod of boxing but in reality he was just one hyped fighter. He fought in a weak era , went 12 rounds against guys like Tillis, Green, Smith and Tucker who I think is Tyson's best win. When he faced better competition, he got knocked out. And his fanboys should stop with that past-prime schit . Dude was a young full of juice mofo when he got knocked out by Buster and when he got stopped by Holyfield. So many gullible people are so nostalgic and emotional about a very hyped fighter. Lennox, Holy, Bowe, Tua, Ike were the real deals. This man is being too much arse kissed mostly because of his hyped aura.

His handlers knew how "good" he is, so they avoided an immediate big money rematch with Buster. Pretty sure that they had a big rematch clause in that contract. They fed him with more stiffs to put him back in the hype-train and then cash in vs Holyfield. Man, Don King was a big marketing genius.

I have read the other responses and most of them completely disagree with you. I disagree with that because you are not 100% wrong...nor are you 100% correct.

The fact is, Tyson in the mid to late 80s was a physical phenom whose speed, power and punch combinations were real. You can't make that up...just go and watch the footage. It's what led to him annihilating very good heavyweights. Yes he went the distance but that's only 2 of his first 9 successful title defences. The rest were like executions. To say that version of Mike Tyson was not a great fighter or in conversation as one of the greatest ever heavies is asinine. This is also the Tyson casuals will remember.

Most never bring up the Tyson post Douglas and post prison. That clearly was not the same fighter and yet he still won a world title, still beat some top contenders and went back and forth with one of the greats in Holyfield for about 4 or 5 rounds. Losing to someone like that has no shame in it.

The marketing however is tremendous and to this day more people think of Tyson v Spinks than even know about Tyson v Holyfield.

[Caractacus]

88 Foreman would've stopped 88 Tyson, period! Foreman was too damn strong and gritty.

Tyson would have been intimadated.
Foreman had once been a sparring partner to one of TYSON'S IDOLS
Charles "Sonny" Liston.

[jwfg]

Tucker for the three belts (WBA, WBC and IBF), Tyson was declared undisputed HW champ when the result was announced. Spinks for the lineal

I think you need to get the dictionary out and look up the word, undisputed. That term has been around a lot longer than the belts. When there is no dispute, someone is not undisputed. Spinks had a claim to the heavyweight championship, which was well known going into the fight and therefore, Tyson wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

I know what undisputed means thanks. Lineal means little in my book, if Spinks never fought Tyson and retired then what? No one can ever claim undisputed ever again, utter nonsense.

But Spinks didn't retire. He was active, the Ring Magazine champion and still the man who beat the man. Call it lineal, call it what you want, but Tyson wasn't the undisputed champion until he beat Spinks. That's why it was such a huge fight.

[Controversial]

I think you need to get the dictionary out and look up the word, undisputed. That term has been around a lot longer than the belts. When there is no dispute, someone is not undisputed. Spinks had a claim to the heavyweight championship, which was well known going into the fight and therefore, Tyson wasn't undisputed until he beat Spinks.

I know what undisputed means thanks. Lineal means little in my book, if Spinks never fought Tyson and retired then what? No one can ever claim undisputed ever again, utter nonsense.

But Spinks didn't retire. He was active, the Ring Magazine champion and still the man who beat the man. Call it lineal, call it what you want, but Tyson wasn't the undisputed champion until he beat Spinks. That's why it was such a huge fight.

The three belts (WBA, WBC and IBF) were on the line in the Tucker fight and in the Spinks fight. The man who beat the man thing is crap, Marciano retired undefeated so that mythical line was broken, it was also broke before that when Tunney retired. Who a boxing magazine decides is the 'true' champ means nothing to me. Using that logic you could say no one who wins a belt is really a champ unless they beat the lineal champ. If Fury retired tomorrow then the mythical line starts again based on who wins all the belts. As Tyson did versus Tucker.

[jwfg]

The man who beat the man thing is crap,

I think you've just ruined your own argument there.

You might not be aware of this, but the Heavyweight Championship of the World predates your three belts. Spinks was the man, he beat Larry Holmes and Michael didn't retire. He was still the man, he was still the heavyweight champion of the world. Tyson mopped up the three belts by beating Berbick, Bonecrusher and Tucker, but his claim to the title was still disputed. That's why he was not the undisputed champion until he beat Spinks. I don't know why this is so difficult for you, you're usually quite smart.

Did you also think that Ali wasn't the man when the WBA gave Ernie Terrell a belt for beating Eddie Machen?

[Controversial]

The man who beat the man thing is crap,

I think you've just ruined your own argument there.

You might not be aware of this, but the Heavyweight Championship of the World predates your three belts. Spinks was the man, he beat Larry Holmes and Michael didn't retire. He was still the man, he was still the heavyweight champion of the world. Tyson mopped up the three belts by beating Berbick, Bonecrusher and Tucker, but his claim to the title was still disputed. That's why he was not the undisputed champion until he beat Spinks. I don't know why this is so difficult for you, you're usually quite smart.

Did you also think that Ali wasn't the man when the WBA gave Ernie Terrell a belt for beating Eddie Machen?

The point I'm making is the lineal line can break so in reality it means nothing. Marciano retired undefeated, no one beat him. If Fury retired tomorrow then no one has beaten him so it just starts again. Spinks held the IBF belt and was stripped of it. Yes I get some people still say he never lost so still "technically" the champ but he was stripped for refusing to fight Tucker.

[jwfg]

The man who beat the man thing is crap,

I think you've just ruined your own argument there.

You might not be aware of this, but the Heavyweight Championship of the World predates your three belts. Spinks was the man, he beat Larry Holmes and Michael didn't retire. He was still the man, he was still the heavyweight champion of the world. Tyson mopped up the three belts by beating Berbick, Bonecrusher and Tucker, but his claim to the title was still disputed. That's why he was not the undisputed champion until he beat Spinks. I don't know why this is so difficult for you, you're usually quite smart.

Did you also think that Ali wasn't the man when the WBA gave Ernie Terrell a belt for beating Eddie Machen?

If Fury retired tomorrow then no one has beaten him so it just starts again based on who wins all the belts.

But Spinks didn't retire. You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

[Controversial]

I think you've just ruined your own argument there.

You might not be aware of this, but the Heavyweight Championship of the World predates your three belts. Spinks was the man, he beat Larry Holmes and Michael didn't retire. He was still the man, he was still the heavyweight champion of the world. Tyson mopped up the three belts by beating Berbick, Bonecrusher and Tucker, but his claim to the title was still disputed. That's why he was not the undisputed champion until he beat Spinks. I don't know why this is so difficult for you, you're usually quite smart.

Did you also think that Ali wasn't the man when the WBA gave Ernie Terrell a belt for beating Eddie Machen?

If Fury retired tomorrow then no one has beaten him so it just starts again based on who wins all the belts.

But Spinks didn't retire. You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

He was stripped of the IBF belt for refusing to fight Tucker

[jwfg]

If Fury retired tomorrow then no one has beaten him so it just starts again based on who wins all the belts.

But Spinks didn't retire. You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

He was stripped of the IBF belt for refusing to fight Tucker

That's not what I asked.

You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

[Controversial]

But Spinks didn't retire. You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

He was stripped of the IBF belt for refusing to fight Tucker

That's not what I asked.

You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

He beat Holmes for the IBF belt so yes but he was stripped of it.

[jwfg]

He was stripped of the IBF belt for refusing to fight Tucker

That's not what I asked.

You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

He beat Holmes for the IBF belt so yes but he was stripped of it.

You honestly think Spinks gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the IBF stripped him? Be honest.

[Controversial]

That's not what I asked.

You don't think he had a claim to the Heavyweight Championship of the world?

He beat Holmes for the IBF belt so yes but he was stripped of it.

You honestly think Spinks gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the IBF stripped him? Be honest.

Yes I do. He was stripped for refusing to fight his mandatory challenger and Tucker and Douglas fought for that belt.

[jwfg]

He beat Holmes for the IBF belt so yes but he was stripped of it.

You honestly think Spinks gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the IBF stripped him? Be honest.

Yes I do. He was stripped for refusing to fight his mandatory challenger and Tucker and Douglas fought for that belt.

So you believe Ali gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the WBA stripped him in 1965 for refusing to fight his mandatory?

[Controversial]

You honestly think Spinks gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the IBF stripped him? Be honest.

Yes I do. He was stripped for refusing to fight his mandatory challenger and Tucker and Douglas fought for that belt.

So you believe Ali gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the WBA stripped him in 1965 for refusing to fight his mandatory?

If you have a belt and are stripped off it you are no longer a holder of that belt. Do you not consider Ernie Terrell to be a world champ then?

[jwfg]

Yes I do. He was stripped for refusing to fight his mandatory challenger and Tucker and Douglas fought for that belt.

So you believe Ali gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the WBA stripped him in 1965 for refusing to fight his mandatory?

If you have a belt and are stripped off it you are no longer a holder of that belt. Do you not consider Ernie Terrell to be a world champ then?

He was a belt holder. Nothing more.

You didn't answer my question. Do you think Ali gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the WBA stripped him in 1965 for refusing to fight his mandatory?

[Controversial]

So you believe Ali gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the WBA stripped him in 1965 for refusing to fight his mandatory?

If you have a belt and are stripped off it you are no longer a holder of that belt. Do you not consider Ernie Terrell to be a world champ then?

He was a belt holder. Nothing more.

You didn't answer my question. Do you think Ali gave up all claim to the heavyweight championship when the WBA stripped him in 1965 for refusing to fight his mandatory?

I don’t know what you mean by “all claim”. He was WBC champ and was stripped of the WBA belt. So he was still a champ.