Who ranks higher historically? Wlad or Mike Tyson

[gilgamesh]

Byrd's biggest win over Tua. It was probably his best performance. Bryd was awful against Vitaly but luckily for him Vitaly was worse.

Byrd had no power and sometimes was not active enough. However, he was Very good defensively (though as great defensively as some people believe. Good hand speed, and overall good boxing skills.

Agree the Holyfield fight doesn't mean anything.

Vitali wasn't worse against Byrd he just suffered an injury and quit. It was an odd choice to quit when all he had to do was hold on and stand up for 9 more minutes, but he quit.

Feels like a fluke win, but still Byrd won it.

Holyfield had just come off beating Rahman when he lost to Byrd so it wasn't totally meaningless, but it definitely wasn't anywhere near the best Holyfield.

I'd agree that due to where they were in their careers and how impressive the performance, that his win over Tua is his best.

[Ambling Alp II]

Where would you rate Usyk.

He would be above Wlad if you place emphasis on losses

Usyk also has bigger wins than Wlad's biggest. Wlad just has several more.

Byrd was better than anyone hw that Usyk has beat.
Klitschko also beat Byrd very decisively. Usyk couldn't even do that in four attempts against fury and Josua.

This all favors Klitschko. However, we have to weigh that against Klitschko's embarrassing defeats, which makes it close between these two.

[gilgamesh]

Where would you rate Usyk.

He would be above Wlad if you place emphasis on losses

Usyk also has bigger wins than Wlad's biggest. Wlad just has several more.

Byrd was better than anyone hw that Usyk has beat.
Klitschko also beat Byrd very decisively. Usyk couldn't even do that in four attempts against fury and Josua.

This all favors Klitschko. However, we have to weigh that against Klitschko's embarrassing defeats, which makes it close between these two.

Usyk's wins over Fury and Joshua are bigger wins than Wlad over Byrd.

Fury and Joshua are both more accomplished Heavyweights than Byrd. In all likelihood neither has more skill than Byrd, but they have bigger wins.

I don't know why you act as if Usyk's wins were indecisive somehow. He Damn near stopped Fury the first time around. He won all 4 of those fights clear. They were competitive sure, but he won them.

[Ambling Alp II]

When I say bigger wins, I am mainly going by how good the fighter actually was. I don't care much if it was a WBS title fight or not. I simply don't think Fury and Joshua are that good. Byrd was not an ATG or anything, but was better.

Usyk did not score a Ko in any of the four fights. He did not win a lopsided decision either. Her deserved the decisions, but they were competitive fights. One off night, Ok. But he was 0 for 4. a true ATG gets some stops/or lopsided wins against those two.

[gilgamesh]

Byrd would've lost to them both, and accomplished less than either of them so I don't know what is you see that makes you believe Byrd to be better.

[Jaywheel]

I don't know that prime HW Byrd loses to Fury and Joshua.

[gilgamesh]

Maybe not, but I don't know that he beats them either. His record isn't any better than either one of them.

[Ambling Alp II]

Byrd beat Tua. Fury and Joshua have not beat anyone that good. Byrd didn't have much power, but overall had very good boxing skills. At a certain point, we have to believe what are our eyes are telling us when watching these fights.

[gilgamesh]

Byrd beat Tua. Fury and Joshua have not beat anyone that good. Byrd didn't have much power, but overall had very good boxing skills. At a certain point, we have to believe what are our eyes are telling us when watching these fights.

Fury and Joshua both beat Wladimir while Byrd lost to him twice.

Joshua also beat Povetkin who Byrd could not defeat.

Both Fury and Joshua have more title defenses than Byrd, and won more titles.

[Ambling Alp II]

Oh come on. Klitschko was ancient by then. Even then, Fury still had trouble with him. Byrd was way past his best by the time he fought Povetkin. you have to factor in the stages of fighter's careers.

The sheer amount of title defenses don't mean anything. You can always find someone to beat.

[gilgamesh]

Byrd defended his title against guys who are considered weak challengers and barely scraped by against almost all of em.

He got a draw with an older Golota, He was dropped twice and barely survived Jameel McCline, he got the benefit of a close call against Fres Oquendo.

These are not Elite Heavyweights, but Byrd could not definitively separate himself from them.

[cfang]

Byrd only beat limited boxers. He was a level below aj and especially fury who only lost to usyk. I don’t often disagree with alp but am here. I don’t rate Byrd and aj and fury better by almost any yardstick.

[keithmoonhangover]

Byrd only beat limited boxers. He was a level below aj and especially fury who only lost to usyk. I don’t often disagree with alp but am here. I don’t rate Byrd and aj and fury better by almost any yardstick.

Who do you rate higher, Tua or Wilder?

[cfang]

Mmm it’s close. Tua never won a title but was a top contender for a long time. Wilder won the wbc and made 9 defences. I’d take tua over wilder h2h for sure but it terms of what they achieved. I may have to take Wilder. Also it’s hard to say how good wilder was. Those fury fights seem to take a lot out of him

[Cojimar 1946]

Where would you rate Usyk.

He would be above Wlad if you place emphasis on losses

Usyk also has bigger wins than Wlad's biggest. Wlad just has several more.

Byrd was better than anyone hw that Usyk has beat.
Klitschko also beat Byrd very decisively. Usyk couldn't even do that in four attempts against fury and Josua.

This all favors Klitschko. However, we have to weigh that against Klitschko's embarrassing defeats, which makes it close between these two.

I don't think Lewis beat anyone better than Byrd either. Once upon a time Holyfield and Tyson were better but not the versions Lewis faced. Who if anyone Lewis beat would you put over Byrd?

[Ambling Alp II]

Ruddock, Bruno, Mercer should rate above Byrd. You could argue for guys like McCall, Rahman, and Morrisson. Before people start looking up their losses, they were not legends. They had their ups and downs. Like Byrd. You have to weigh the good against the bad and not cherry pick.
Ruddock had a lot of power, and some boxing ability. The Ko of Dokes was huge. Was competitive with Tyson
Bruno had underrated boxing ability and some power. Beat McCall and ko'd Coetzee in one.
Mercer had a great chin, a lot of heart, some boxing ability and some power. Of course he was probably the most inconsistent of them all. Morrison was his biggest official win. Thought he should have got the decision against Lewis in a great fight. Lost to Holyfield was it was a great fight.

Obviously, Lewis was better than all of these guys. Yes he had a couple of losses, and some close calls. However, he several good fighters. He also had some devastating wins.

At a certain point, we have to actually watch the fights and look at their performances regardless of the opponent. When Lewis fought Tyson, Tyson was obviously past it. but Lewis fought a very good fight. He didn't just win a close decision. After the first round, he was in complete control.

[gilgamesh]

Bruno, Ruddock, Byrd and Rahman are all on a similar level to me.

I'd probably have Byrd and Rahman rated higher than the other 2 by a slight margin, but they're all pretty much in the same league.

Holyfield was the Heavyweight Champion and the man to beat when Lewis beat him. Past his best maybe, but he was still the #1 rated guy in the division heading into their 1st bout.

[gilgamesh]

Usyk also has bigger wins than Wlad's biggest. Wlad just has several more.

Byrd was better than anyone hw that Usyk has beat.
Klitschko also beat Byrd very decisively. Usyk couldn't even do that in four attempts against fury and Josua.

This all favors Klitschko. However, we have to weigh that against Klitschko's embarrassing defeats, which makes it close between these two.

I don't think Lewis beat anyone better than Byrd either. Once upon a time Holyfield and Tyson were better but not the versions Lewis faced. Who if anyone Lewis beat would you put over Byrd?

Vitali Klitschko was better than Chris Byrd.

I know Byrd has the win over Vitali due to injury, but I mean...come on. He had lost almost every round in that bout prior to the injury.

Good win, but a fluke win. Not something that stamps him as better than Vitali ultimately with the careers they went on to have following that bout.

[Ambling Alp II]

The scoring of that "fight" was awful. It was about even. It was a terrible fight. Neither of them did much at all. But in the end Byrd won. Byrd also beat Tua. Bryd deserves to be rated higher.

[gilgamesh]

The scoring of that "fight" was awful. It was about even. It was a terrible fight. Neither of them did much at all. But in the end Byrd won. Byrd also beat Tua. Bryd deserves to be rated higher.

It wasn't about even. Vitali was winning clearly.

Like you've said in this fight. At some point we have to watch the fight, and how they perform in them. Vitali unquestionably performed better, and won most of his fights far more decisively than Byrd.

Byrd deserves credit for the toughness, and the defensive skill that allowed him to hang in there, and win against Vitali in an unusual manner, but to say he's better than Vitali I just can't go with that.

Realistically though they wouldn't be separated by much.

[Ambling Alp II]

I had Byrd up by a point. My friend had Klitschko up by a point. We both laughed at how bad it was. So yeah watch the fight. It's very obvious that there weren't great fighters in the ring.
Klitschko never hurt Byrd. Neither guy landed much of anything. There were rounds where almost nothing happened. Sure, if you want to give all of those rounds to Klitschko, he could be up 7-2. But you could do the same for Byrd.

But ultimately, it does matter if he was up 9-0. He quit. He lost. This is boxing. If you ahead and don't finish, you lost.

I don't have Byrd up light years over Klitschko. there are scores of fighters that I rate above Byrd. But Byrd won the head to also beat a better opponent than Klitschko ever beat. Klitschko doesn't have anything to overcome that.

With a great fighter, (or even a really good one), people talk about two things.
1. Who he beat.
2. Attributes that the fighter had. i.e. Power, and speed. A great left kook, a jab etc.

You never hear either of these with Klitschko. It's never who he beat. It's the WBS title defenses. Not specific names.
You never hear about what he supposedly did well. A tall guy almost automatically gets credit for a great jab regardless of how good it actually was. People won't even do that for him.

These two things have always been very telling.

[Cojimar 1946]

Ruddock, Bruno and Mercer being ahead of Byrd is a hard sell.

Ruddock only beat shot fighters and never beat a prime ranked opponent. The old Holyfield Byrd beat is probably better than anyone Ruddock beat and obviously he has the wins over Vitali and Tua that are better than any Ruddock win. Ruddocks loss to Lewis is also embarrassing given he was taken out so quickly and wasn't remotely competitive.

Mercers best wins are Damiani, Morrison, and the Witherspoon fight most feel he lost. How does that measure up to Vitali, Tua, McCline, etc especially given the controversy in the Witherspoon scoring? He also has losses to Ferguson and old Holmes and the draw to Wilson.

[gilgamesh]

I had Byrd up by a point. My friend had Klitschko up by a point. We both laughed at how bad it was. So yeah watch the fight. It's very obvious that there weren't great fighters in the ring.
Klitschko never hurt Byrd. Neither guy landed much of anything. There were rounds where almost nothing happened. Sure, if you want to give all of those rounds to Klitschko, he could be up 7-2. But you could do the same for Byrd.

But ultimately, it does matter if he was up 9-0. He quit. He lost. This is boxing. If you ahead and don't finish, you lost.

I don't have Byrd up light years over Klitschko. there are scores of fighters that I rate above Byrd. But Byrd won the head to also beat a better opponent than Klitschko ever beat. Klitschko doesn't have anything to overcome that.

With a great fighter, (or even a really good one), people talk about two things.
1. Who he beat.
2. Attributes that the fighter had. i.e. Power, and speed. A great left kook, a jab etc.

You never hear either of these with Klitschko. It's never who he beat. It's the WBS title defenses. Not specific names.
You never hear about what he supposedly did well. A tall guy almost automatically gets credit for a great jab regardless of how good it actually was. People won't even do that for him.

These two things have always been very telling.

Vitali also had the claim of having never been behind on the scorecards in a fight. Ever, and he generally won more emphatically and more impressive than Byrd even though he lost their head to head. Byrd certainly gets more credit for their head to head bout. I don't think it's enough to best Vitali's legacy overall, and I don't think anyone, even you genuinely believes he could've repeated that feat in a rematch with Vitali.

I would agree with you though that ultimately they're not separated by a lot in terms of all time Heavyweight rankings, but Vitali would have to be ahead to me.

[keithmoonhangover]

I had Byrd up by a point. My friend had Klitschko up by a point. We both laughed at how bad it was. So yeah watch the fight. It's very obvious that there weren't great fighters in the ring.
Klitschko never hurt Byrd. Neither guy landed much of anything. There were rounds where almost nothing happened. Sure, if you want to give all of those rounds to Klitschko, he could be up 7-2. But you could do the same for Byrd.

But ultimately, it does matter if he was up 9-0. He quit. He lost. This is boxing. If you ahead and don't finish, you lost.

I don't have Byrd up light years over Klitschko. there are scores of fighters that I rate above Byrd. But Byrd won the head to also beat a better opponent than Klitschko ever beat. Klitschko doesn't have anything to overcome that.

With a great fighter, (or even a really good one), people talk about two things.
1. Who he beat.
2. Attributes that the fighter had. i.e. Power, and speed. A great left kook, a jab etc.

You never hear either of these with Klitschko. It's never who he beat. It's the WBS title defenses. Not specific names.
You never hear about what he supposedly did well. A tall guy almost automatically gets credit for a great jab regardless of how good it actually was. People won't even do that for him.

These two things have always been very telling.

Vitali also had the claim of having never been behind on the scorecards in a fight. Ever, and he generally won more emphatically and more impressive than Byrd even though he lost their head to head. Byrd certainly gets more credit for their head to head bout. I don't think it's enough to best Vitali's legacy overall, and I don't think anyone, even you genuinely believes he could've repeated that feat in a rematch with Vitali.

I would agree with you though that ultimately they're not separated by a lot in terms of all time Heavyweight rankings, but Vitali would have to be ahead to me.

My problem with Vitali is his lack of top quality wins. It's often made out that his loss to Lewis was his best win.

[gilgamesh]

He definitely does have a lack of top quality wins for sure. I don't think anyone could argue that.