Do you consider Mike Tyson a P4P all-time great?

[Evil Abed]

He's easily a top 20 ATG Heavyweight

[slicksouthpaw16]

Not for me. The only time he won against another ATG heavyweight was the Holmes fight. Nobody really counts that as a good win do they? Larry was shot to ****. To make the P4P list he needed to have beaten Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe, Foreman (some big time ducking there by Tyson) and a few more solid contenders. There are too many names like McNeeley, Frazier, Julius Francis on his resume for it to be considered a who's who of his era, coupled with some truly embarrassing losses.
None of his title wins were against fighters who will be remembered as being anything special either. Berbick, Tucker, Smith, Bruno and Seldon won't even place in most people's top 250 HW fighters.


I gotta say though, I loved watching the man fight.

I agree. He was very exciting and explosive and even now, i still enjoy watching most of his old fights. That being said, i think the majority of people confuses his excitement and explosiveness with actual accomplishments, and IMO they just don't stack up with fighters like Ali (which even isn't debatable) Holmes, Foreman, Louis ect. He gets on my ATG heavyweight list ( at the back) by being the youngest heavyweight champion, unifying heavyweight and having a decent title reign. He has not beaten any all time great heavyweights in their prime or consistently stayed at the top the way the other great heavyweights did.

[bojangles1987]

I don't know, for as talented as Tyson was he was a very mentally weak fighter who depended on intimidation and against the all time greats I think that would lose him a lot of fights. He is a tough stylistic matchup for any heavyweight but I think he is barely on the fringe of ATG status and P4P is not really mentionable.

[StarshipTrooper]

why not ?
his opponents were allways taller ..
mike was barely 5'10", not 6" like some claim...

The term is "pound 4 pound" not "inch 4 inch". Tyson was 217 in his prime.

Poet

[TheGreatA]

He's an all-time great at heavyweight but not a pound for pound all-time great. I think that term should be reserved for the 50 best boxers to ever do it.

[crold1]

He's an all-time great at heavyweight but not a pound for pound all-time great. I think that term should be reserved for the 50 best boxers to ever do it.

I'm too liberal...I think ATG extends to fighters with a legit case for the top 100. Mike (I'm doing the list now) is my #13 Heavyweight which puts him well out of top 100 range for me (I think very few pure/natural Heavyweights belong anywhere near a top 100 P4P list.

[BigBear]

Bum harry greb is ATG p4p why Tyson Isnt

[QueensburyRules]

I'm too liberal...I think ATG extends to fighters with a legit case for the top 100. Mike (I'm doing the list now) is my #13 Heavyweight which puts him well out of top 100 range for me (I think very few pure/natural Heavyweights belong anywhere near a top 100 P4P list.

- - Mike the #1 P4P Ring P4P Debut fighter from over 30 years ago. Ya could look it up!

Even crotchety ol'timers were capitulating saying they'd never seen such a fighter in their lifetime.

[The Old LefHook]

You're pretty funny.

And pretty right, halfwit.

[Floyd Sinclair]

He was a one dimensional fighter that only knew how to fight in the peak a boo stance. More versatility may have given him a better chance against Lewis and especially Holyfield. Also, perhaps his biggest win against Larry Holmes is very overrated in my opinion. I think the long layoff Holmes was coming off of gave Mike a big advantage. When Holmes was more active in the early 90s he was alot more sturdy even being older, and gave Holyfield a tough time