Mike Tysons legacy.

Agreed. 1Mike Tyson 2Jack Johnson 3Joe Louis 4Muhammad Ali 5Rocky Marciano 6Jack Dempsey 7George Forman 8Joe Fraizer 9Evander Holyfield 10Larry Holmes :lol1: :lol1:

Agreed. 1Mike Tyson 2Jack Johnson 3Joe Louis 4Muhammad Ali 5Rocky Marciano 6Jack Dempsey 7George Forman 8Joe Fraizer 9Evander Holyfield 10Larry Holmes yikes, im as big a tyson fan as they come, but to rank him #1 on a list of heavy's is a stretch.... Soda

tyson at his peak had the abilty to beat anyone ever, look at what he did to larry holmes nobody does that to larry, old or not Agreed. 1Mike Tyson 2Jack Johnson 3Joe Louis 4Muhammad Ali 5Rocky Marciano 6Jack Dempsey 7George Forman 8Joe Fraizer 9Evander Holyfield 10Larry Holmes

That was a good post and I also agree, but again opinion...and as a self described Tyson nut hugger my opinion is slightly biased. Either side of this argument could pull up enough information to make it seem that the evidence is on their side. The way I look at it is this..... ***Disclaimer*** This is all my opinion....im sitting here in my living room watching TV and dont feel like doing any real research right now so the FACTS will be a little limited but its my opinion anyways Tyson is at a disadvantage when discussed. First of all because it seems that there is no middle ground on Tyson, he is either an all time great or a bust, and both camps dont allow moderate members into their fraternity. If there is anything you compliment Tyson for you are a nut hugger, if you criticize anything you are a hater that all being said.... Tyson's career is so hard to judge based on his "complications." pre prison he was unstopable, and I think if he had 9 rematches with Buster Tyson would win all 9 of them, but Douglas had his number on that night in Tokyo. Now moving on from there. Like it has been said, Tyson had a short shelf life, not automatically a bad thing (Look at Marciano) but what happend was is Tyson missed 3+ years of the end of his prime. Like being said before had he fought Holy or Lewis during that time period there MAY be no discussion to this debate had Tyson won those fights but they never took place so its impossible to say... Holy and Lewis fought a beat Tyson that shouldnt have been in those rings...Tyson's talent is undeniable...he for sure had the talent to be a top 5 heavyweight but there is also no doubting that he was weak minded. Because of this his success depended greatly on his handlers. Once his orginal crew was gone, and Don King got his hands on Tyson it was all over for Mike, he was a time bomb at that point. I also feel that it is hard to compare guys like Marciano and Tyson because of the time that separates them. I do not have lists in front of me, and dont feel like doing the extensive research right now but I can bet that a prime Tyson would have floored most if not all of Marciano's opponents. Would he have beaten Marciano? IDK impossible to tell But marciano was smart enough to get out when he did. He surly would have been beaten had he kept fighting, just like Tyson. Its so hard to compare different eras of fighters.... so basically...is Tyson an all time great? imo yes Soda

good post I completely agree Thanks man. I took a long time researching it and wrote a 3-part 15 page article on the analysis between Tyson, Holyfield, and Lewis. Ultimately, it still boils down to my opionion; but I do feel the facts are on my side.

I'll admit it's close between the two; but to me it's a slight question of who dominated their respective era's more completely....and there were two distinct eras. To me, the answer is Tyson. Mike fought and beat every single title-holder and previous title holder, with the exception of Tim Witherspoon. That equals 7 titlists or former titlists Mike defeated; and he didn't just defeat them, he destroyed them, with the exception of Bonehugger and Tucker. Lewis beat 5, 2 of which won the title from him, Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman; and did so by knocked him cold or damn near. Also, both are the caliber of Buster Douglas...so, Lewis got knocked out twice by journeymen quality heavyweights. Tyson, just once, and never got a chance to rematch Douglas who was stopped in 3 by Holyfield. I think it's safe to say no one here would have bet on Douglas repeating the trick should he have rematched Mike. Anaother issue is Mike actualy having two careers separated by three years of prison-time. Mike is the type of fighter who peaks early, ala Dempsey, Marciano, and Frazier. Mike was going to be past his prime by age 30 with or without three years of inactivity, yet he is penalized because nature took it's course, just as it did with the other three former champs who shared a similar style. Dempsey was inactive for three years when he fought Tunney at age 31...and lost. Frazier was 29 when Foreman bounced him and never won another signifcant bout. Marciano retired at age 31 because he said his back was shot. Yet, Mike is expected to be the same ball of fire after 3 years in the joint. He was 41-1 and 24 when he went to prison. When he got out and fought again, he was 29 and past his best so it is not fair to say Holyfield and Lewis beat the best Tyson. Fighters age differently depending on their style; this is a fact. Evander may or may not have been able to beat Mike in 1991 when they were originally scheduled to meet; but we'll never know. That Holyfield was dropped by Bert Cooper and stuggled with two old men, Foreman and Holmes. IF Mike hadn't gone to jail in 1991 and fought Lennox Lewis, who won WBC's regonition when Bowe trashed the belt in 1992, who would have won? We'll never know; but that Lewis didn't have Manny Steward and was knocked out by Oliver McCall, who is an average punching heavyweight, at best. Mike's first career, pre-prison, he was an all-time great, unlike his second career, in which he was a top 5 fighter at best. The reason I rank Tyson ahead of Lewis is because Tyson dominated his era more completely than Lewis did his...IMO. Nod disrespect to Lewis, who's an all-time great; but I just feel Mike was greater in his day that Lewis was in his. Reason Tyson's above Lewis: 1. The Tyson-Lewis fight means nothing because Tyson was shot by then. 2. Tyson beat Berbick and the man he took the title from, Thomas. 3. Tyson beat Spinks and the man he took the title from, Homes....and looked far better beating Holmes than Holyfield did when Larry was ever further past his prime. 4. Tyson beat Smith and Tubbs...two of the three WBA titlists...and beat Tubbs in two rounds, the same man who could be argued beat Riddick Bowe years later. 5. Tyson singlehandedly cleaned out the heavyweight division, clearing the way for the class of the 90's. 6. Tyson fought and beat #2 ranked Razor Ruddock twice, dominating him both times and destroyed #4 ranked Alex Stewart, who had tested Holyfield severly before Evander won on a cut. Mike's first career, pre-prison, he was an all-time great, unlike his second career, in which he was a top 5 fighter at best. The reason I rank Tyson ahead of Lewis is because Tyson dominated his era more completely than Lewis did his. Mike fought a younger version of Frank Bruno than fought Lewis...and looked better in doing so. He even looked better in the rematch than Lewis did in his lone fight with Frank. The same can be said of Tony Tucker. good post I completely agree

I'll admit it's close between the two; but to me it's a slight question of who dominated their respective era's more completely....and there were two distinct eras. To me, the answer is Tyson. Mike fought and beat every single title-holder and previous title holder, with the exception of Tim Witherspoon. That equals 7 titlists or former titlists Mike defeated; and he didn't just defeat them, he destroyed them, with the exception of Bonehugger and Tucker. Lewis beat 5, 2 of which won the title from him, Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman; and did so by knocked him cold or damn near. Also, both are the caliber of Buster Douglas...so, Lewis got knocked out twice by journeymen quality heavyweights. Tyson, just once, and never got a chance to rematch Douglas who was stopped in 3 by Holyfield. I think it's safe to say no one here would have bet on Douglas repeating the trick should he have rematched Mike. Anaother issue is Mike actualy having two careers separated by three years of prison-time. Mike is the type of fighter who peaks early, ala Dempsey, Marciano, and Frazier. Mike was going to be past his prime by age 30 with or without three years of inactivity, yet he is penalized because nature took it's course, just as it did with the other three former champs who shared a similar style. Dempsey was inactive for three years when he fought Tunney at age 31...and lost. Frazier was 29 when Foreman bounced him and never won another signifcant bout. Marciano retired at age 31 because he said his back was shot. Yet, Mike is expected to be the same ball of fire after 3 years in the joint. He was 41-1 and 24 when he went to prison. When he got out and fought again, he was 29 and past his best so it is not fair to say Holyfield and Lewis beat the best Tyson. Fighters age differently depending on their style; this is a fact. Evander may or may not have been able to beat Mike in 1991 when they were originally scheduled to meet; but we'll never know. That Holyfield was dropped by Bert Cooper and stuggled with two old men, Foreman and Holmes. IF Mike hadn't gone to jail in 1991 and fought Lennox Lewis, who won WBC's regonition when Bowe trashed the belt in 1992, who would have won? We'll never know; but that Lewis didn't have Manny Steward and was knocked out by Oliver McCall, who is an average punching heavyweight, at best. Mike's first career, pre-prison, he was an all-time great, unlike his second career, in which he was a top 5 fighter at best. The reason I rank Tyson ahead of Lewis is because Tyson dominated his era more completely than Lewis did his...IMO. Nod disrespect to Lewis, who's an all-time great; but I just feel Mike was greater in his day that Lewis was in his. Reason Tyson's above Lewis: 1. The Tyson-Lewis fight means nothing because Tyson was shot by then. 2. Tyson beat Berbick and the man he took the title from, Thomas. 3. Tyson beat Spinks and the man he took the title from, Homes....and looked far better beating Holmes than Holyfield did when Larry was ever further past his prime. 4. Tyson beat Smith and Tubbs...two of the three WBA titlists...and beat Tubbs in two rounds, the same man who could be argued beat Riddick Bowe years later. 5. Tyson singlehandedly cleaned out the heavyweight division, clearing the way for the class of the 90's. 6. Tyson fought and beat #2 ranked Razor Ruddock twice, dominating him both times and destroyed #4 ranked Alex Stewart, who had tested Holyfield severly before Evander won on a cut. 7. Mike fought a younger version of Frank Bruno than fought Lewis...and looked better in doing so. He even looked better in the rematch than Lewis did in his lone fight with Frank. The same can be said of Tony Tucker.

top 3 ? no; top 5? no; top 10? yes.... top three spots respectively go to ali, louis, holmes

barring all variables of comparing areas, who could beat tyson in 1987, , only a prime foreman is a defeinate loss becuase of the styles. prime holmes and prime ali and prime lewis had a chance maybe a prime liston. tyson was way too big and strong and fast and explosive for anybody else. If you think otherwise you dont know a damn thing.

Where do you guys put him among the all-time greats.I think a prime and in shape Tyson is a top 3 heavyweight of all time.Just my opinion.Where do you put him? top 3 is madness i havehim bout 11-12

I personally have Tyson somewhere in the top 20...15 to 20. My top 3 are: 1. Ali 2. Louis 3. Foreman

tyson at his peak had the abilty to beat anyone ever, look at what he did to larry holmes nobody does that to larry, old or not

Well it looks like most us us "idiots" agree.Not to discredit anyone from having an opinion but anyone who says Tyson is top 3 all time or even top 5 for that matter is alot higher on the iodiot meter than the rest of us. :)

I don't understand how Lennox can be below Tyson. He's a year older than Tyson, and he beat him. Maybe it's because i put a big focus on longevity of a fighter. I don't believe that fighters who last one or two years on top then fizzle can be considered great.

My All Time Top Ten.....today. :rolleyes: 1. Muhammad Ali 2. Joe Louis 3. Larry Holmes 4. Jack Dempsey 5. Rocky Marciano 6. Mike Tyson 7. Lennox Lewis 8. Joe Frazier 9. Jack Johnson 10. George Foreman you are out of your flippin mind posting something like this, but it's your opinion and I guess we have to respect it...in a way...

My All Time Top Ten.....today. :rolleyes: 1. Muhammad Ali 2. Joe Louis 3. Larry Holmes 4. Jack Dempsey 5. Rocky Marciano 6. Mike Tyson 7. Lennox Lewis 8. Joe Frazier 9. Jack Johnson 10. George Foreman

Name 10 better? Ali, Louis, Marciano, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Lewis, Holmes, Liston, Dempsey, Jack Johnson, and then Tyson comes somewhere in the top 15.

I respect your opinion.But seriosly ask yourself this.Would a 190 pound Louis have been able to keep a sharp and massive Tyson off him? I honestly don't know.I do think he would have TKOed the Tyson of the last 15 years tho.

No way Tyson is in the top 10 heavyweights of all time. No fuckin way. Name 10 better?

In my personal opinion I have to say Ali,Louis and Liston but thats just me.Lennox Lewsi and Holyfield both are higher than Tyson IMO too I might add. I respect your opinion.But seriosly ask yourself this.Would a 190 pound Louis have been able to keep a sharp and massive Tyson off him?