Could Mike Tyson have been the greatest heavyweight ever?

[Controversial]

For arguments sake lets pretend Cus D'Amato never died and Tyson was a disciplined fighter. No drink, drugs, partying, shagging around, just a dedicated fighter doing everything the right way. Eating right, training right and living right. Rooney, Jacobs and co make up 'Team Tyson'.

Do you think Tyson would have ended up as an ATG great heavyweight, maybe the best ever? Or do you think Holyfield or Lewis, would have had his number no matter what he did?

[Robinson]

To many he is.

It depends on how one looks at the word...All Time Great.

Historical context ?
Legacy ?
Classical standing ?
Career achievements?
Advancement of boxing ?
or

how they fare in a peak for peak head to head match up
with others....

You pick and tell me.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I don't believe he could ever have made it as high as number one, no.

[kikibalt]

No!

[bollox]

No!

[dajuggernaut]

To many he is.

He is the best ever to all the uneducated fans. Ask them to name one fighter who he beat and they can't.

[allworld80]

Would an untroubled Tyson have beaten Lewis, Holyfield, or even Bowe? Possibly. Would it make him #1 even if he did. No.

[Ezzard]

Anyone 'could have' been! All that you have is what he actually was/is.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Nope, he made the most out of his talents. In a different era, he could have some wins that would mean more. But he couldn't come close to beating Holyfield in 1,000 meetings at any age. If it wasn't Evander, it would be a Joe Frazier.

Mike was a tough and talented guy, who dukes it out with DLH for the lowest ring IQ of high level fighters in the history of the sport. Didn't matter who trained him, the only thing that changed was his opponents.

[Robinson]

To many he is.

He is the best ever to all the uneducated fans. Ask them to name one fighter who he beat and they can't.

These uneducated fans also generally make up the bulk of PPV buys too.
So boxing needs them.

[gregor]

The problem is that Tyson, no matter how disciplined, had a style that wasn't suited for older fighters. Still, if he gets through Holyfield (which would be the biggest challenge), and fights LL before getting too old... well, there were not many challenges left at this point (Klitschko's style is tailor-made for Tyson, even if it would be a little past prime Tyson).

I think it wouldn't be impossible, but he would need a lot of luck. Note that the question wasn't if he could stay undefeated, but if he could be the greatest. With wins/competitive fights with LL and Holy, and wins over Klitschko(s) his resume would be hard to beat.

[Adamj1987]

he's y fave heavy of all time and he in my top 5 greatest ever he could of had a long reign and id of liked to of seen the prime tyson vs bowe i think that could of been the trilogy at heavy in the 90s not holy-bowe i think he could of saftly been champion for the majority of the 90s

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Nope, he made the most out of his talents. In a different era, he could have some wins that would mean more. But he couldn't come close to beating Holyfield in 1,000 meetings at any age. If it wasn't Evander, it would be a Joe Frazier.

Mike was a tough and talented guy, who dukes it out with DLH for the lowest ring IQ of high level fighters in the history of the sport. Didn't matter who trained him, the only thing that changed was his opponents.

- I thought you and Dempsey were duking out for the Dumbest Doodad Diddlesquat Superpooperscooper Title.

Tyson was the only heavyweight who ever transcended the weight classes in his prime to garner wide consensus that this could be the greatest fighter in boxing history if not at very least the best heavy ever. He was doing this in the recent shadow of Ali. Go back and read the articles and watch the interviews ye of little memory.

His potential seemed unlimited coupled with the impressive achievements backed up with the most storied HOF team in history. Unfortunately on this board we get the weak hissies like saadsack piling on a already downed opponent to impress coaches and peers, and nobody went down the tubes harder than Iron Mike when he jumped the rails.

These articles are typical what if rubbish ignoring that every fighter is born and raised with a unique blend of good and bad physical and mental attributes that define his career within his era. Mike's career and era stands up nicely in spite of his being a diminished fighter for the latter 3/4ths of his career. It's a one off career of seeing a fighter not just dominant but so devastating before hitting his physical and mental prime juxtaposed with the bizarre theatre of seeing a fighter in his traditional physica and mental prime past his boxing prime and scarcely contending as he makes headlines for his infamy outside of boxing.

Perhaps under different circumstances Tyson could've have gotten better treatment and not fallen so far off the rails, but it's telling how differently SRLeonard gets the sympathetic treatment for being derailed by physical injury, whereas Mike is skewered for mental injury, the difference in American culture between being a face and and underdog vs being a heel and a bully as their careers evolved into.

Ibro wisely ranks Lewis, Tyson, and Field as 12/13/14th which seems a fair summary of the era where too many big fights were put off until they had less impact. Had this thread been made just 8 yrs prior, there'd a night and day change in the responses as Tyson's rabid bandwagons fans would be out in a mob stomping everyone down.

Fast forward 8 yrs from now, and I suspect there will be a night and day difference again as Mike's legacy will prove to be lasting even as he further deteriorates.

[observer1]

He is in many peoples top 10's, Including mine.

He was certainly an underachiever considering his talent, but that said, he did achieve alot.

He was the youngest ever champion at 20. Unified all belts to become undisputed at 21/22?

Only reason why Tyson became champion against after prison because he was Physically at his peak, but his Boxing skills were all but diminished.

One thing to put into context how he was is looking at this:

Tyson Before Prison 41-1
Tyson After Prison 9-4

most people remember Tyson for losing to Holyfield/Lewis. Since many people here start following boxing in the late 90's.

To see Tyson in his Prime years, not just watching them as a highlight reel, but actually seeing them. Tyson certainly had qualities about him that others never had

[Seamus]

To those who said no, I ask the question, why ?

Tyson in his prime had excellent hand speed, knockout power in both hands, very good head movement, and a solid chin.

[Flump]

To those who said no, I ask the question, why ?

Tyson in his prime had excellent hand speed, knockout power in both hands, very good head movement, and a solid chin.

Because it transpired through his career that he couldn't turn around a fight he was losing, surely essential if we're talking GOAT.

[Ezzard]

If he could have been then he would have been closer to achieving said status.

There are a number of figthers who 'could have been' but weren't, for far less damning reasons than Tyson's.

A top fighter with too many shortcomings for this job.

[Seamus]

Tyson was so dominant through his first 37 fights, that he didn't need to turn around a fight. Even in his first loss, he floored his opponent with a wicked uppercut that would have seen him through against alot of other fighters. Unfortunately for Tyson, beginning with the Douglas fight, he began abandoning the things that got him where he was. That night in Tokyo it was evident that Tyson was no longer using his excellent and often overlooked, head movement. More and more after that fight, Tyson just looked for one big punch, and against the majority of HW's, it would have been enough.

[Flump]

Tyson was so dominant through his first 37 fights, that he didn't need to turn around a fight. Even in his first loss, he floored his opponent with a wicked uppercut that would have seen him through against alot of other fighters. Unfortunately for Tyson, beginning with the Douglas fight, he began abandoning the things that got him where he was. That night in Tokyo it was evident that Tyson was no longer using his excellent and often overlooked, head movement. More and more after that fight, Tyson just looked for one big punch, and against the majority of HW's, it would have been enough.

All true, but Bowe, Holyfield and Lewis were superior to his 80's competition, and a some point his fragile mentality would have become apparent, IMO.

[man]

To those who said no, I ask the question, why ?

Tyson in his prime had excellent hand speed, knockout power in both hands, very good head movement, and a solid chin.

absolutely agreed. and his defense is underrated
IMO. nevertheless i think the combination of very
big boxers who are in great shape and are fast is
tough for the tyson type to handle. while height
as such is not certainly an advantage, guys like
lennox and the ks are like shorter guys - just
bigger. and that is tough if the difference is too
big. 20cm in height is hard to overcome.

i think tyson was absolutely great, could have
become the very best, but that would have taken
very much dedication. because in his early days
he did not face ATG opponents (larry was over the
top in my eyes). and once someone like LL would
popped up, like in mid-late nineties, tyson would
have needed all the wisdom and the luck he could
get (remember marciano walcott ...) ...

i do not think he had any chance to be undefeated.
the division was too strong in the nineties. i see him
ko bowe, always struggle with holy&lewis. definitely
would have knocked out the pre-emanuel version of
wlad, fighting something brutal with vitali.

the most important thing for him would have been
to build up on great defense. the body and head
movement he showed early on. he was not tall enough
to make part of his career ali-style defenseless.
i think one big hinderance to the "all time greatest" could
have been - sorry - intelligence. i mean ring intelligence.
after having seen early interviews i would not say tyson
was stupid, but to me with his weird live he more and
more boxed stupid. no second plan, always with brute
force through the front door.

but against tall strong guys he would have needed some
alternative plan ... yet the chances for him to be smart,
with or without cus, ... very, very slim. way too much hype.
and i guess today's media world made it worse than for
joe louis in his day. i guess joe could have gone shopping
in paris or argentina in quite normal ways. can imagine
tyson entering a coffee shop in rio around 1990? traffic
jams all over the place ... no way he could have stayed
tuned to become the ATG ...

[SaadOffTheDeck]

To those who said no, I ask the question, why ?

Tyson in his prime had excellent hand speed, knockout power in both hands, very good head movement, and a solid chin.

As physically gifted as he was, he didn't have it between the ears. Mike wasn't capable of adapting mid fight, not just in losses. Guys like Tucker & Bonehugger that clutched their way to the distance. Mike just threw one punch and happily fell into a clinch.

The greatest fighter would always need the ability to incorporate a plan B and Mike couldn't do it. He was a programmed fighter and a destructive one. But he would always run into somebody smarter. Tyson also was no more than an average in fighter.

[Ezzard]

Tyson was so dominant through his first 37 fights, that he didn't need to turn around a fight. Even in his first loss, he floored his opponent with a wicked uppercut that would have seen him through against alot of other fighters. Unfortunately for Tyson, beginning with the Douglas fight, he began abandoning the things that got him where he was. That night in Tokyo it was evident that Tyson was no longer using his excellent and often overlooked, head movement. More and more after that fight, Tyson just looked for one big punch, and against the majority of HW's, it would have been enough.

See this is where we have to part ways.

When he abandoned the things that got him where he was he was showing us exactly why he could never have been the best. There were plenty of things Ali could no longer do post Frazier I, but he still managed to beat many great fighters.

Spare tyre Larry still manged to find a way to eke past opponents when he was no longer in great shape.

Lewis was obviously way past it but found a way to beat Vitali.

Holyfield came back from the dead many times.

Somehow, because Tyson was unable to reclaim his skills after the Holyfield defeat this is supposed to prove how great he could have been. Meanwhile fighters who did have the mental and emotional fortitude to return to an ever decreasing well are penalised.

Tyson showed great ability when he was on top but not so much when he wasn't.

He was an excellent fighter who comes up short when compared to the very best. Nothing bad about that. Very few do manage it.

[Crease]

In my opinion... YES!

Tyson had it all...
And I rceckon he and Lewis should'v met in the 90s... And Tyson would have beat him.

[jameshoward]

yes watch some of his training videos from his young days and you will see the light
in his prime he had
speed
power
punch accuracy
great technique on punches
great head movement
decent stamina
decent chin
and more

too many people remember him after his prime from 89 onwards and underate his heart, stamina and chin

[BoxBuzz]

Because of all the elements he possessed that made him who he was, the answer is absolutely no.

If you just take the good and only the good....well....then we are not talking about Mike Tyson anymore are we? And Mike Tyson is the subject we are talking about right?

So once again....NO.