Though the question posed in the title of this article takes a past tense approach – as in who WAS the greater fighter, we all know that Mike Tyson and Roy Jones are still fighting. Or they are both about to. Sort of. In exhibition form (an exhibition bout that may or may not morph into a real fight at any given point once one or both fighters takes a shot on the chin).
It’s big; with this Saturday’s heavily hyped and much-maligned Tyson-Jones bout gaining a ton of attention and expectation. Both men are absolute, undeniable, all-time boxing legends. During the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s, these two fighting machines lit up the planet; the boxing population and the non-boxing fans forced to take notice. During their time, Tyson and Jones gave us great fights, they each proved their own greatness, and both warriors became heroes to millions.
Yet as we know, both men are not done yet. Who knows what may follow Saturday night’s fight/exhibition/event. Tyson has already spoken of the possibility of boxing again.
But assuming neither legend carries on and gets in there with a real, live and in his prime current and active fighter, let’s ask the question now – who is the greater fighter: Tyson or Jones.
Asking such a question is akin to asking, who was greater: Michael Jackson or Prince? Both were at the top of their game around the same time; Price peaking a short time after Jackson did. And the two pop stars had at least something of a rivalry. If Tyson was Bad, or a Thriller, then Jones was Crazy as well as Delirious. This Saturday, the two living legends will collide on Triller.
Tyson at his pomp scared more fighters (and fans) than anyone this side of Sonny Liston. Jones at his peak dazzled more opponents (and fans) than anyone this side of Muhammad Ali or Sugar Ray Robinson. Tyson was for some time seen as an invincible fighter, so too was Jones, only for a longer spell.
Tyson met his kryptonite in the form of James Douglas. Jones met his in the form of Antonio Tarver. It was a momentous shock when Tyson lost for the first time. The stunning loss Jones suffered in losing for the first time (really and truly, begging the pardon of Montell Griffin and what he managed to do in 1997) registered just a few hits lower on the Richter scale.
Tyson’s greatest wins came in fights with: Michael Spinks, Larry Holmes, Trevor Berbick, Pinklon Thomas, Razor Ruddock and Andrew Golota.
Jones’ greatest wins came in fights with: James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, John Ruiz, Mike McCallum, Virgil Hill, Montell Griffin (fight two) and Vinnie Pazienza.
Tyson, 50-6(44), was the king of destruction for around three years before his limitations were exposed.
Jones, 66-9(47) was the pound-for-pound king for ten long years until his reflexes betrayed him.
There is no question, Jones was/is the greater overall fighter of the two. But of course, this means zero when it comes to what will happen on Saturday night in Los Angeles.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 24 Nov 2020, 06:11
by DrDuke
Jones was a greater fighter. Both were dominant champions of their divisions and eras, but only Jones faced and won great opponents in prime. Tyson had the biggest scalp on paper. It was Holmes, but that victory was far less valuable, because Holmes was rusty and ageing. Jones' wins over Toney and Hopkins surpass any Tyson's ones.
It's interesting, that they are in a similar situation, as both had thier most dominant reigns, when the division couldn't suggest great opposition (Jones' LHW reign and Tyson's 80s reign), but they both still became extremely popular because of their talents.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 24 Nov 2020, 07:04
by Jimmy2020
Jones.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 24 Nov 2020, 14:45
by Nile4000
Jones. But realize that Roy had a greater time at the top of the mountain. Outside influences destroyed Mike.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 24 Nov 2020, 18:32
by elmersalsa
Roy Jones.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 24 Nov 2020, 18:59
by f read
Overall Roy Jones i would say was superior. Tyson is the better stronger heavyweight. Jones was a more total package that is the advantage to being a lighter weight you can move up being a heavyweight there is nowhere to go but down and most do not. Leon Spinks who was a small heavyweight moved down but that is not the norm especially for a heavyweight who is getting up in years. It is much more difficult to shed the pounds as we age.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 25 Nov 2020, 06:25
by Tuan_Jim
Tyson cleaned up his division, was willing to face anyone, and won some tough fights.
Jones didn't clean up any of his divisions, was unwilling to face some opponents, and got KOd in any tough fights.
Tyson for me.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 25 Nov 2020, 12:08
by chrisjs1985
Jones, easily.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 02:14
by gilgamesh
Jones was a better fighter. Tyson was a bigger star.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 02:15
by gilgamesh
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑25 Nov 2020, 06:25
Tyson cleaned up his division, was willing to face anyone, and won some tough fights.
Jones didn't clean up any of his divisions, was unwilling to face some opponents, and got KOd in any tough fights.
Tyson for me.
When did Tyson clean up his division? He never beat Holyfield. Holyfield was there to be faced, and he never beat him.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 02:21
by oogiebe
Jones was clearly the better fighter.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 03:51
by Ruthless-RKO
gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Nov 2020, 02:14
Jones was a better fighter. Tyson was a bigger star.
As accurate as you can get.
His comeback fight against McNeely did 1.5m PPV’s.. who the fvck is McNeely? Never mind the opponent, this was 1.5m people paying money to see Tyson himself.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 04:02
by Onetimeonly
Jones, not even close. Both are overrated by most.
gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Nov 2020, 02:14
Jones was a better fighter. Tyson was a bigger star.
As accurate as you can get.
His comeback fight against McNeely did 1.5m PPV’s.. who the fvck is McNeely? Never mind the opponent, this was 1.5m people paying money to see Tyson himself.
And that's what the exhibition will be too. Nobody buying it is buying it to see Jones. They're buying it to see Tyson.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 05:24
by Ruthless-RKO
Tougher question may be, who has the best career highlights?
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 06:22
by Onetimeonly
Obviously Tyson.
Re: Who Was The Greater Fighter: Tyson Or Jones?
Posted: 26 Nov 2020, 06:57
by DrDuke
Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑26 Nov 2020, 05:24
Tougher question may be, who has the best career highlights?
Tyson had a brighter career with both highlights and lowlights.
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑25 Nov 2020, 06:25
Tyson cleaned up his division, was willing to face anyone, and won some tough fights.
Jones didn't clean up any of his divisions, was unwilling to face some opponents, and got KOd in any tough fights.
Tyson for me.
When did Tyson clean up his division? He never beat Holyfield. Holyfield was there to be faced, and he never beat him.
When Tyson flattened Spinks Holyfield hadn't even moved up. There's literally always going to be someone new coming along, but in 2 years Tyson beat all three alphabet champs, the lineal champ, and a slew of ex-champs and top contenders. If that's not cleaning up your division, I don't know what is. I'd love to hear of another heavyweight champ doing the same in such a short period of time.
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑25 Nov 2020, 06:25
Tyson cleaned up his division, was willing to face anyone, and won some tough fights.
Jones didn't clean up any of his divisions, was unwilling to face some opponents, and got KOd in any tough fights.
Tyson for me.
When did Tyson clean up his division? He never beat Holyfield. Holyfield was there to be faced, and he never beat him.
When Tyson flattened Spinks Holyfield hadn't even moved up. There's literally always going to be someone new coming along, but in 2 years Tyson beat all three alphabet champs, the lineal champ, and a slew of ex-champs and top contenders. If that's not cleaning up your division, I don't know what is. I'd love to hear of another heavyweight champ doing the same in such a short period of time.
Joe Louis cleaned up his division in about the same time. He didn't beat Multiple World Champions because there WEREN'T multiple World Champions. But he beat a who's who of the guys to beat all just prior to winning the title, and shortly after winning it. In the mid 1930's.
When did Tyson clean up his division? He never beat Holyfield. Holyfield was there to be faced, and he never beat him.
When Tyson flattened Spinks Holyfield hadn't even moved up. There's literally always going to be someone new coming along, but in 2 years Tyson beat all three alphabet champs, the lineal champ, and a slew of ex-champs and top contenders. If that's not cleaning up your division, I don't know what is. I'd love to hear of another heavyweight champ doing the same in such a short period of time.
Joe Louis cleaned up his division in about the same time. He didn't beat Multiple World Champions because there WEREN'T multiple World Champions. But he beat a who's who of the guys to beat all just prior to winning the title, and shortly after winning it. In the mid 1930's.
When Tyson flattened Spinks Holyfield hadn't even moved up. There's literally always going to be someone new coming along, but in 2 years Tyson beat all three alphabet champs, the lineal champ, and a slew of ex-champs and top contenders. If that's not cleaning up your division, I don't know what is. I'd love to hear of another heavyweight champ doing the same in such a short period of time.
Joe Louis cleaned up his division in about the same time. He didn't beat Multiple World Champions because there WEREN'T multiple World Champions. But he beat a who's who of the guys to beat all just prior to winning the title, and shortly after winning it. In the mid 1930's.
Sounds like good company for Tyson to be in then!
Taking over in quick fashion in a weak era isn't that impressive. He never would've been able to beat Riddick Bowe, Holyfield, or Lennox Lewis, and those guys came along while he was in jail.
Holyfield would've beaten him in 1989 if he'd have gotten the shot.
Joe Louis cleaned up his division in about the same time. He didn't beat Multiple World Champions because there WEREN'T multiple World Champions. But he beat a who's who of the guys to beat all just prior to winning the title, and shortly after winning it. In the mid 1930's.
Sounds like good company for Tyson to be in then!
Taking over in quick fashion in a weak era isn't that impressive. He never would've been able to beat Riddick Bowe, Holyfield, or Lennox Lewis, and those guys came along while he was in jail.
Holyfield would've beaten him in 1989 if he'd have gotten the shot.
Agree with you on Holyfield generally but think 89 may have been a bit too soon for him versus that Tyson; Bowe is a mystery, Lewis I don't agree with at all. Flummoxed when basic boxers Bruno and Mercer jabbed with him, one-punched by McCall and Rahman. Never got a good review versus short guys in that timeframe: Ocasio, Billups, Butler. Cannot see Pepe Correra taking him to a win over Tyson.
Taking over in quick fashion in a weak era isn't that impressive. He never would've been able to beat Riddick Bowe, Holyfield, or Lennox Lewis, and those guys came along while he was in jail.
Holyfield would've beaten him in 1989 if he'd have gotten the shot.
Agree with you on Holyfield generally but think 89 may have been a bit too soon for him versus that Tyson; Bowe is a mystery, Lewis I don't agree with at all. Flummoxed when basic boxers Bruno and Mercer jabbed with him, one-punched by McCall and Rahman. Never got a good review versus short guys in that timeframe: Ocasio, Billups, Butler. Cannot see Pepe Correra taking him to a win over Tyson.
Holyfield would've had a harder time with Tyson in 1989 I'll grant you that, but ultimately he would've been tougher, and outwilled him just like the other times they fought.
gilgamesh wrote: ↑26 Nov 2020, 13:27
Taking over in quick fashion in a weak era isn't that impressive. He never would've been able to beat Riddick Bowe, Holyfield, or Lennox Lewis, and those guys came along while he was in jail.
Holyfield would've beaten him in 1989 if he'd have gotten the shot.
Agree with you on Holyfield generally but think 89 may have been a bit too soon for him versus that Tyson; Bowe is a mystery, Lewis I don't agree with at all. Flummoxed when basic boxers Bruno and Mercer jabbed with him, one-punched by McCall and Rahman. Never got a good review versus short guys in that timeframe: Ocasio, Billups, Butler. Cannot see Pepe Correra taking him to a win over Tyson.
Holyfield would've had a harder time with Tyson in 1989 I'll grant you that, but ultimately he would've been tougher, and outwilled him just like the other times they fought.
I think you under rate tyson a bit. Holyfield was a smaller heavyweight back then. That same sized holyfield struggled with Bowe.
I see Tyson winning a close decision against holyfield in 89, only to lose thereafter.
Agree with you on Holyfield generally but think 89 may have been a bit too soon for him versus that Tyson; Bowe is a mystery, Lewis I don't agree with at all. Flummoxed when basic boxers Bruno and Mercer jabbed with him, one-punched by McCall and Rahman. Never got a good review versus short guys in that timeframe: Ocasio, Billups, Butler. Cannot see Pepe Correra taking him to a win over Tyson.
Holyfield would've had a harder time with Tyson in 1989 I'll grant you that, but ultimately he would've been tougher, and outwilled him just like the other times they fought.
I think you under rate tyson a bit. Holyfield was a smaller heavyweight back then. That same sized holyfield struggled with Bowe.
I see Tyson winning a close decision against holyfield in 89, only to lose thereafter.
I don't underrate Tyson at all. He would've been at his absolute best still in 1989, and he still wouldn't have been good enough for Holyfield. Holyfield had more heart than him, more ability, and could take his punch. Tyson would've given him more trouble in '89 than he gave him in 1996, but he never would've beaten him.
