BoxRec

el_destrampado wrote:just remember, Holyfield kicked Tyson's ass after he(holyfield) had already been in 3 damaging wars with bowe, a war with bert cooper, michael moorer, and dwight qawi. yet he still had enough to take tysons best stuff.

hollyfield have had total 38 bouts right now.. when Tyson fought Holy Tyson was allready 44 bouts. maybe not too many wars but enaugh to even them up.

4-th fight after being unactive for 4 years .. three of them in prison and Tyson's best stuff?

Taki... wrote:

apocalypse1280 wrote:

Taki... wrote: Smith was being outboxed by the stiffest least natural HW ever to be champion (Bruno) until Frank's glass jaw was exposed, again. If Smith had any kind of workrate he would have given Tyson a whole lot of trouble. Holyfield showed exactly what happens when a HW with plenty of ability and no fear steps in with 'Iron' Mike.

No. Holyfield and Lewis showed what happens when a HW with ability and no fear steps in with the shell of 'Iron' Mike.

Holyfield and Lewis would've beaten ANY version of Mike Tyson. The key thing to keep in mind when considering this is that Evander Holyfield ISN'T Michael Spinks and Lennox Lewis ISN'T Tony Tucker.

You meant to say LEWIS, not Smith, right?

Trevor Berbick, Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker, Frank Bruno, Michael Spinks... all either past their prime or never had a prime in the first place.

bullshit taki.


berbick was in his prime and just 32 years old entering the fight. berbick was the WBC champ and coming off his peak fight vs pinklon thomas.


berbick was a better fighter when he fought tyson than when he fought holmes



tony tucker was ONLY beaten by mike in his prime. tucker was a huge man who also had a lot of skills. a far past prime tucker lasted 12 rounds with lennox lewis.




michael spinx was only 31 years old, undefeated. he was rusty, but he was near his best.




bonecrusher was coming off a 1 round demolition of tim witherspoon. bonecrusher was just 33 years old and the WBA champion.


bonecrusher was green when he fought holmes, he was prime when he fought tyson,

Taki... wrote:

apocalypse1280 wrote:

Taki... wrote: Smith was being outboxed by the stiffest least natural HW ever to be champion (Bruno) until Frank's glass jaw was exposed, again.
If Smith had any kind of workrate he would have given Tyson a whole lot of trouble. Holyfield showed exactly what happens when a HW with plenty of ability and no fear steps in with 'Iron' Mike.

No. Holyfield and Lewis showed what happens when a HW with ability and no fear steps in with the shell of 'Iron' Mike.

Holyfield and Lewis would've beaten ANY version of Mike Tyson. The key thing to keep in mind when considering this is that Evander Holyfield ISN'T Michael Spinks and Lennox Lewis ISN'T Tony Tucker.

holyfield lost to or struggled in his prime with far less fighters than a peak mike tyson.


lennox was knocked out twice in his prime by 1 punch from B level contenders.

It says so much about Tyson that his best win (whilst in his 'prime') came against Donovan Ruddock.

taki,


tysons best win was over michael spinx, who i rate in my top 35 heavyweights of all time.

Taki... wrote:Guys like James Smith and Tony Tucker showed Tyson's limitations against big tall guys. If either had a workrate slightly higher than that of a corpse Tyson might not have built up such an overblown reputation early in his career.

u mean the way bonecrushe HELD ON to tyson for 12 rounds?



tucker was very skilled big man who is vastly underated. he also was very durable. still, tyson easily outpointed him




what about the way tyson demolished old larry holmes, a tall boxer??


only time holmes ever stopped in entire career. a 5 years older holmes went on to give holyfield 12 very close rounds.




what about the way tyson demolished big tall flashy skilled tyrell biggs?



taki,


before you make fun of tony tubbs. just remember a much older far past his prime tony tubbs fought 10 even rounds with riddick bowe.

JAHamilton77 wrote:Its all speculation, but I too doubt even prime Mike could take Ali. I dont believe Ali is the greatest, but Tyson couldnt have taken him.

I'll say this for Tyson, for 3-4 rounds he would have given any heavyweight in history, probably with the exception of Foreman, a lot of trouble. The problems is the baddest guys out there, ALi, Liston, Foreman, Frazier

For the record, I think Tyson would have smoked Frazier. Joe was pretty slow and it took him a while to get going too, Tyson would have started very fast and been all over him. I think Tyson would have been capable of doing what Foreman did and jumping on him early and shocking him into defeat.

Ali would have had a few problems with Tysons speed, and might even have gotten knocked down early, but he would have had too much savvy and skills and would have stopped him late in the fight after totally breaking his spirit.

foreman...bad fight for Mike, walks onto monster shots and gets beaten up badly.

The young raw Lewis who lost to McCall would also have lost to Tyson.

Arsenal wrote:

Taki... wrote:

bigzab wrote:Thats one way of looking at it. On the other hand, maybe those guys were too cautious for a reason.....

.......these Tyson threads are invincible. They just don't die.

Smith was being outboxed by the stiffest least natural HW ever to be champion (Bruno) until Frank's glass jaw was exposed, again.
If Smith had any kind of workrate he would have given Tyson a whole lot of trouble. Holyfield showed exactly what happens when a HW with plenty of ability and no fear steps in with 'Iron' Mike.

Great examples!

Worth noting also though, Witherspoon was behind on points against Bruno, as was Lewis when they fought.

Bruno was stiff and mechanical, but he had a jackhammer of a jab, and ferocious punching power which kept most people who fought him cautious.

Bonecrusher absolutely shat his pants when he got into the ring with Tyson, he came merely to go the distance. Had he tried to open up against Tyson he would have gotten annihilated and he knew it.

Whilst Tyson had definite flaws in his character, he was a real warrior, I'll give him that, he took a savage battering from Douglas before finally capitulating and in truth was unlucky that the count wasn't picked up correctly. I've watched that fight on tape recently, and believe me, Douglas couldn't have gotten up even 100th of a second quicker than he did, he should probably have been counted out as he was up at 9 1/2 and most refs count someone out if they aren't already fully upright by that point.

Tyson makes my top 10, because the truth is there are very few heavyweight champions of any worth out there, most came and went even quicker than Tyson did. Tyson's mental make up was such that he was destined to have a short shelf life, and I think there was always going to be that point where he imploded. After losing to Douglas, he was never the same again, and never beat a genuine elite fighter in their primes.

Tyson brought an electricity that was sorely lacking in the division, had his reign of terror, then got beat, and stuck around too long, but he made a lot of new boxing fans along the way.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
bullshit taki.

berbick was in his prime and just 32 years old entering the fight. berbick was the WBC champ and coming off his peak fight vs pinklon thomas.

berbick was a better fighter when he fought tyson than when he fought holmes

tony tucker was ONLY beaten by mike in his prime. tucker was a huge man who also had a lot of skills. a far past prime tucker lasted 12 rounds with lennox lewis.

michael spinx was only 31 years old, undefeated. he was rusty, but he was near his best.

bonecrusher was coming off a 1 round demolition of tim witherspoon. bonecrusher was just 33 years old and the WBA champion.

bonecrusher was green when he fought holmes, he was prime when he fought tyson,

How wrong can you be?

Berbick was nothing short of ordinary, and beating up Pinklon Thomas hardly gainsays that.

Tony Tucker was a big durable guy. KOing him would have been impressive, but Tyson couldn't manage that, could he?

Michael Spinks showed up to pick up a massive pay check! He fell over as soon as Tyson came anywhere near him!

James Smith had ONE thing going for him and that was KO power. He had zero work-rate and if he didn't get the KO he could get beaten by very ordinary fighters (Rodrigues, Frazier, Tubbs... all in Smith's 'prime').

jamesmcdonnell wrote: Worth noting also though, Witherspoon was behind on points against Bruno, as was Lewis when they fought.

Bruno was stiff and mechanical, but he had a jackhammer of a jab, and ferocious punching power which kept most people who fought him cautious.

Bonecrusher absolutely shat his pants when he got into the ring with Tyson, he came merely to go the distance. Had he tried to open up against Tyson he would have gotten annihilated and he knew it.

Whilst Tyson had definite flaws in his character, he was a real warrior, I'll give him that, he took a savage battering from Douglas before finally capitulating and in truth was unlucky that the count wasn't picked up correctly. I've watched that fight on tape recently, and believe me, Douglas couldn't have gotten up even 100th of a second quicker than he did, he should probably have been counted out as he was up at 9 1/2 and most refs count someone out if they aren't already fully upright by that point.

Tyson makes my top 10, because the truth is there are very few heavyweight champions of any worth out there, most came and went even quicker than Tyson did. Tyson's mental make up was such that he was destined to have a short shelf life, and I think there was always going to be that point where he imploded. After losing to Douglas, he was never the same again, and never beat a genuine elite fighter in their primes.

Tyson brought an electricity that was sorely lacking in the division, had his reign of terror, then got beat, and stuck around too long, but he made a lot of new boxing fans along the way.

I just feel that Tyson's record doesn't quite tally with the high standing he's held in. Compare it with guys like Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Louis, Holyfield and Lewis. All of those fighters fought, and beat, all time top 20 HW's in their careers. Tyson by contrast fought 3 guys who would be in that class; one (Holmes) was way, way past his prime, and the other two (Lewis and Holyfield) exposed Tyson completely.
Tyson was and is very overrated, yes he was exciting, but that doesn't make him 'great'. I'd say he was the Arturo Gatti of HW boxing.

Yes, that's fair comment, although I always felt for instance that Frazier was overrated based on his performances against Ali. Frazier's durabilty combined with Ali's lack of one shot power made their fights competitive. However, Frazier was annihilated by Foreman, and never fought other big punchers in Shavers or Lyle. He also never fought Norton.

I guess the point I am making is that there's a lot of heavyweight champs who when you look at their records closely, don't look too impressive. Jack Dempsey, Marciano, Liston for example. Liston was a big fearsome man, but his reign as champ was very short. Dempsey barely defended his title as a heavyweight, and spent more time chasing skirt. Marciano only beat old versions of former light heavyweights and a sadly spent Louis.

Lewis can be knocked for his two crushing losses, but has longevity on his side, Holmes had a couple of disputable decisions but was around a long time also. Louis, despite being a small heavyweight could really crack and despite losing his prime years still was top of the pile what seemed like forever.

Tyson lacks big name wins in his career, but I still think, which is only my opinion, that he would have tested any heavyweight in history for a few rounds.

Tucker did manage to go the distance, but he had to fight negatively to do so, and that was probably due to breaking his hand early on.

Everyone else who tried to bash Tyson up got done over pretty brutally in Tyson's prime.

Great fighter for a while, but not a great champion.

Holyfield and Lewis would've beaten ANY version of Mike Tyson. The key thing to keep in mind when considering this is that Evander Holyfield ISN'T Michael Spinks and Lennox Lewis ISN'T Tony Tucker

Yes, Holyfield & Lewis were better fighters than Tucker & Spinks, but if Holyfield or Lewis had fought a peak Mike Tyson, they would have been defeated, simple as that!

Some might say you should not compare results, and to some extent, sometimes it has no bearing, but take Alez Stewart for example. In Sept 1989, he extended and had Holyfield in big trouble. When he fought Tyson, Dec 1990, he was demolished.

Maybe I should be comparing results, I don't know?

Bruno was beating Smith, Witherspoon and Lewis before being KOed.

BB49 is Spinks really in your top 35 HW of all time? At what number?

Compare it with guys like Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Louis, Holyfield and Lewis.

taki,


which top 20 heavyweight of all time did lennox lewis beat?

please dont say far past his prime holyfield who practically won the 2nd fight


foreman beat frazier, norton

marciano beat walcott, charles

louis beat baer, schmeling, walcott

frazier beat ali

ali beat liston, foreman, frazier, norton, patterson

holyfield beat bowe, and Drew lennox


who did lennox beat thats arguebally top 20 heavyweight?




arsenal,


i made a mistake. I have spinks at # 39 on my all time heavyweight list

taki,


if u think that little of tysons competition. than im guessing u dont rate larry holmes high considering he beat on worse 80s competiton

Roars Like Me wrote:http://img441. .us/img441/8655/tyson55sf.gif

How to bob and weave ol' Mikey styley.

aa damn I have not seen that fight. Could you possible think of uploading it? I see you have it in your computer... maybe?

Wow theres a complete line divide when it comes to Tyson's career!

I'm kinda in the middle when it comes to Tyson's place in history...

Is he a hall of famer? Hell, yes, unifying a division and a four year dominating reign is not a thing you can ignore

Is he a top 10 heavyweight? I would have to say no but i definately put him in the top 15. He has had more defenses and longer reign than Sonny Liston. But his comeback is pretty unimpressive, in comparison to Ali and Holmes, Foreman, Tyson didn't show he can compete with the '90s era fighters.

Did he hurt the sport? To a certain extent, some mainstream fans view boxing as a sideshow instead of a sport. But same can be said about other sports... so in my eyes i would lean towards no

In terms of accomplishments Tyson is on a level with someone like Liston. He decimated the division before becoming champion but then had a relatively short reign.

Tyson has the physical gifts of speed and power. he took a good shot and had fine skills early on in a fight BUT mentally he was never there. The weaknesses in his psyche became apparent later on but he was always that way. In an overall list Mike comes in somewhere between 10-15.

longrob wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:

sly2kusa wrote: Not a very hard thing to have done at the stage Tyson was at in his career.

Personally - if they would have fought back in the early 1990's before Tyson's incarceration - I think Lewis would have gone the same way that Razor Rudduck did back in those days (meaning either a UD or TKO at some point).

Lennox Lewis is a far superior fighter to Ruddock.

Donovan Ruddock was the most overrated heavyweight of the 1990's.

Just becaue he went 19 rounds the one dimensional, overrated 1991 version of Mike Tyson, loads of people go overboard about him.

Ruddock was one dimensional, with less than average stamina & a chocolate pudding chin.

Lewis' 2 round demolition of him in 1992, just about sums him up.

I've never heard anyone use the expression''chocolate pudding chin''
That a rascist slurr, boy? Just joking

LOL!!!!

I was eating chocolate pudding at the time & I just thought that Ruddock's chin must have been as soft as it, as he was floored so many times.

I just had to post it, because I just cannot see the fuss surrounding Ruddock; he was an average heavyweight at best.

I think people talk him up because it somehow makes Tyson look better.

The only thing that separated the 1991 version of Tyson & the even less impressive Ruddock, is that Tyson had a great chin; suspect stamina, but a great chin nonetheless. Ruddock did not have any of these.

Caulk Rocket wrote:

Ezzard wrote:In terms of accomplishments Tyson is on a level with someone like Liston. He decimated the division before becoming champion but then had a relatively short reign.

Tyson has the physical gifts of speed and power. he took a good shot and had fine skills early on in a fight BUT mentally he was never there. The weaknesses in his psyche became apparent later on but he was always that way. In an overall list Mike comes in somewhere between 10-15.

10-15 is still really high, but I'd put Tyson there just because of his freakish punches.

You may be right Caulk. He gets there for his physical prowess and his cleaning out of the division.

his 80s title reign was an incredible reign. he did everything a champion was suppose to do, and he finally brought life back to the heavyweight division and offically unified the titles for the first time since 78.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:his 80s title reign was an incredible reign. he did everything a champion was suppose to do, and he finally brought life back to the heavyweight division and offically unified the titles for the first time since 78.

Title reigns are alphabet sanctioned. Tyson's reign as champion was not really that impressive.

Ezzard wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:his 80s title reign was an incredible reign. he did everything a champion was suppose to do, and he finally brought life back to the heavyweight division and offically unified the titles for the first time since 78.

Title reigns are alphabet sanctioned. Tyson's reign as champion was not really that impressive.

But you have to give him credit for unifying he title. you can't ask more than that from someone who is not allowed to be great.

bigzab wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:his 80s title reign was an incredible reign. he did everything a champion was suppose to do, and he finally brought life back to the heavyweight division and offically unified the titles for the first time since 78.

Title reigns are alphabet sanctioned. Tyson's reign as champion was not really that impressive.

But you have to give him credit for unifying he title. you can't ask more than that from someone who is not allowed to be great.

Yes, he does deserve credit - 100%... The thing is there ween't alpha titles for Liston to get when Floyd wasn't fighting him. It's the same for all of the contenders throughout history who were kept away from the championship. This means that some fo the old guys are getting pushed down becasue they didn't have one of these plastic titles to strap on their waist.

Tyson cleaned out the division in a very impressive style but if we want to compare him with the guys from the past then we have to make sure what we mean by his reign. His reign as champion of the world began with Spinks and ended not long after with Douglas.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Compare it with guys like Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Louis, Holyfield and Lewis.

taki,


which top 20 heavyweight of all time did lennox lewis beat?

please dont say far past his prime holyfield who practically won the 2nd fight

Holyfield was 'far past his prime' 18 months after beating a 30 (not 54) year old Tyson... twice?

Let's be clear; Tyson cleared out the HW division, there's no disputing that, but it was a very ordinary (Tyson aside), if not poor, division at the time.
The biggest name, by far (historically), in Tyson's W column is a 39 year old Larry Holmes; who, incidentally, hadn't been in the ring for two years prior to that fight.
The fact is that if you look at Tyson's record during his 'prime' 86-90 you'll find ONE great name(Holmes 39 and 2 years inactive), one good name (Spinks 32, 1 year inactive and just showing up to get paid) , and one loss to a nobody!
As I've said Tyson was exciting, but deserves no greater Kudos or ranking in the sport than Michael Spinks.