If Calzaghe retires after Roy Jones Jr is his legacy better then Mike Tyson?

Look at Mike's record. The best fighters he beat- 1.Spinks. A very good fighter but no heavyweight. Still a first round KO is very impressive. 2. Larry Holmes. Was he too old at 39? Yes he was. 3. Bruno. Not really that great a fighter to be honest and the same can be said for Botha. Tyson consistantly lost to the best in his division e.g. Holyfield and Lewis, and he lost to the worst in his divison e.g. Buster Douglas, Kevin McBride and Danny Williams! In regards to Calzaghe he did beat the best. However, he is limited by ducking. People will say Hopkins was too old without mentioning that he pulled out of a deal a few years ago. Also a younger Hopkins would have beaten him- bollocks. A younger Hopkins used to come forward more playing exactly into Calzaghe's hands. He is excellednt against pressure fighters. Apparently Jeff Lacy is now overrated. Where are all those who backed Lacy (the overwhelming favourite- so you are out there!) before THAT fight? Well now he is overrated so Calzaghe doesn't get the credit he deserved. Should he have even faught him if people wont give credit where it is due? Kessler- a better fighter than Lacy! What a victory. And Roy Jones Jr one of the best ever. Those who are RJJ will say he was too old if he loses... Nevermind Woodhall, Bika, Reid... Ali lost to Berbick. Larry Holmes lost to Tyson. Louis lost to 185 pound Rocky Marciano. Lewis lost to McCall and Rahman in his prime. There are many ways I could use different methods with your thinking. Lacy: I was one of the few on this board that said he was OVERRATED. I didn't think he would get his ass kicked like he did against Joe, but, I did say he was overrated. And, what has Lacy done since? That's what some would argue. Hopkins: Without a doubt he was much better back in the day. He was an defensive aggressor. He was always careful when he fought so what the hell are you talking about? His stamina was better. He was athletically better. He punched more. He was more powerful back in the day. He was 43 years old when he fought Calzaghe and he knocked him down. Some say he beat Calzaghe. I think Calzaghe pulled it out when Bernard started to gas. Your acting like Hopkins was undefeated when he met Joe: he lost to Taylor twice....way before that, Roy Jones Jr. when he was younger. ROY JONES JR. IS SHOT SHOT SHOT. He was never the same when he came back down to Light-Heavyweight. We saw what happened to both Tarver and Chris Byrd when they lost the weight from a HW pounds. He has been KFTO twice since moving back down and couldn't even knock out Tito, which in his prime he would have had little trouble.

Resume would go to Joe, legacy to Tyson. Few ppl in the history of the sport have a more profound legacy than Mike, its just the way it is.

Look at Mike's record. The best fighters he beat- 1.Spinks. A very good fighter but no heavyweight. Still a first round KO is very impressive. 2. Larry Holmes. Was he too old at 39? Yes he was. 3. Bruno. Not really that great a fighter to be honest and the same can be said for Botha. Tyson consistantly lost to the best in his division e.g. Holyfield and Lewis, and he lost to the worst in his divison e.g. Buster Douglas, Kevin McBride and Danny Williams! In regards to Calzaghe he did beat the best. However, he is limited by ducking. People will say Hopkins was too old without mentioning that he pulled out of a deal a few years ago. Also a younger Hopkins would have beaten him- bollocks. A younger Hopkins used to come forward more playing exactly into Calzaghe's hands. He is excellednt against pressure fighters. Apparently Jeff Lacy is now overrated. Where are all those who backed Lacy (the overwhelming favourite- so you are out there!) before THAT fight? Well now he is overrated so Calzaghe doesn't get the credit he deserved. Should he have even faught him if people wont give credit where it is due? Kessler- a better fighter than Lacy! What a victory. And Roy Jones Jr one of the best ever. Those who are RJJ will say he was too old if he loses... Nevermind Woodhall, Bika, Reid...

No, just Calzaghe. Pretty much. The only white fighter i can't stand is indeed Calzaghe. And news flash, it has nothing to do with him being white. I just can't stand the arrogance and him acting like he's someone else. Not! He acts like he's been around the A league forever and no one could beat him when in fact he was hiding until very recently, and the reason he's acting like a jerk is because the people in his horizon are all 40 year olds who he knows he has the advantage against. If he was really in the A league fighting Dawson and the young contenders coming up he'd be quiet as a mouse as he was for the most of his career. What a ****ing fraud! NOT BUYING.

Call yourself a nuthugger? I have one of the worst memories on the planet, also I'm too lazy to google anything. But I know Calzaghe gets unnecessary hate, the guy beat Hopkins title defenses I believe. How is that not an atg?

After all that, weve got........Michael Spinks. I appreciate your post, it was a good read but I was looking for just names. I could make a big song and dance about how Calzaghe's opposition is underrated. But at the end of the day, everyone always asks who Joe beat. And I think he's beaten better people than Tyson. Theoretically, Joe should have a greater legacy. But if we're factoring in "impact" and box office, then Tyson would win. More people will know Tyson in 100 years, no doubt. Is that right? I dunno. I was trying to make a back-door point (to certain people:D) Berbick: He beat Ali ;) Tucker: he was actually good. He was undefeated when he fought Mike as well...6'5, 220+, and fast. Smith: OK fighter. Big S.O.B.; strong with a solid shot, but not a whole lot more. Decent boxer, but not elite. Tillis: debatable. Not elite. I still can't get Dundee out of my head wit this fight. Biggs: never lived up to his potential: Gold Medal winner. not elite. not sure, but I think he was undefeated when he met Tyson. Tubbs: not to sure about him. Some say he was good and only had a loss I think when he fought Mike. Looked fat to me in the fight and Mike took him out. I cannot count him as elite either. I'm still looking. Frank Bruno: Big, Strong MF, powerful puncher, but Mentally, eh... I like the guy but he wasn't cut out for Top level boxing; to nice of a guy. Not sure how many losses he had when he fought Mike: one or two I think. He did do well against Lennox Lewis up until he got caught with a haymaker from hell. Razor Ruddock: Ruddock was hailed as a legit threat to the Title and even Lennox said he was a threat. Ruddock was big, powerful, and had pretty good hand speed and skills. Tyson and him battled it out for two fights. Ruddock would later say that those fights ended his prime. Yes, Mike's resume isn't that impressive.

Legacy to me is what kind of fighter they were. Who they fought, and what they accomplished in there career. Tyson was one of the youngest heavyweight champions. And I'm not going to attack either of calzaghes or tyson resume but I think there opposition was about the same in my own personal opinion. Except that Calzaghes career and legacy to me is better because he won all his fights, while tyson hit a downfall and lost to guys like williams, and that one irish bum guy I don't even know his name... Didn't Calzaghe have like either 22-23 defenses at super-middle weight? He has the longest reign as a champion, I believe... Correct me if I'm wrong. Call yourself a nuthugger?

Thread starter needs to define the word "legacy" before I can make a pick Legacy to me is what kind of fighter they were. Who they fought, and what they accomplished in there career. Tyson was one of the youngest heavyweight champions. And I'm not going to attack either of calzaghes or tyson resume but I think there opposition was about the same in my own personal opinion. Except that Calzaghes career and legacy to me is better because he won all his fights, while tyson hit a downfall and lost to guys like williams, and that one irish bum guy I don't even know his name... Didn't Calzaghe have like either 22-23 defenses at super-middle weight? He has the longest reign as a champion, I believe... Correct me if I'm wrong.

Thread starter needs to define the word "legacy" before I can make a pick

I think Tyson has by far the better legacy than CalSlappy...... He was thee Undisputed Champ, something CalSlappy would never dream of or have the balls of becoming Yeah..........Calzaghe unified the 168lb division twice. He held each of the alphabet belts at one time. The only reason he didnt have all 4 belts after he beat Kessler is because the IBF stripped him. But he was undoubtedly, the undisputed champion. Intelligent post otherwise.....Ive never heard that "Calslappy" joke. :You_Rock_

Let's look at some of the facts: Joe fought at 168 and fought fighters only at 168. Not a stretch, is it? OK, he fought a Bernard Hopkins and now Roy Jones Jr., two past prime fighters, one shot to pieces, and two former Middle-weights. Joe has great wins against Lacy and Kessler. Tyson: 5'10, 220. Just about everybody was bigger than him; not much credit though since he is in the HW division. Tyson was 20 when he won the title and went on to unify the title in a short period of time. How long did it take Joe? His best win was against Spinks even though it wasn't his toughest fight. I always give Tyson big props for this win for a few reasons: Spinks was a great light heavyweight Champion who moved up and beat Larry Holmes, even though Holmes was past his prime. Spinks was undefeated going into the Tyson bout and many considered him the lineal Champion. Spinks was in the low 200's and Mike was the "bigger" man for the bout but Spinks still was taller than Mike. Spinks got KFTO in 90 seconds. Key point with Spinks: Rocky Marciano by many lists from historians is considered an all time great, but yet, who did he beat? He beat former middle-weights and light-heavyweights that fought as Heavyweights, and they still weighed less than 200 pounds. Marciano had tough fights against these opponents, while Tyson, KFTO Michael Spinks, an all time great at LH in 90 seconds. But then again, I always say it was OK for Marciano to fight them because, he had no other choice, and, he himself was only 185 pounds...but as long as we put him on the HW All time Great list....here we are. What Joe has over Tyson is keeping it together and sticking with what got him there: his Father/trainer. But hell, he didn't have to deal with 25% of what Tyson had to deal with. I wonder how Joe would have dealt with the pressures...especially at Mike's age. Mike declined as soon as he got rid of Rooney...we saw this with his fight with Bruno, despite the KO win. You also have to remember that Popularity has a lot to do with Legacy. The HW division was in the toilet for ratings. When Tyson came on to the scene, he was a World Wide Phenom. After all that, weve got........Michael Spinks. I appreciate your post, it was a good read but I was looking for just names. I could make a big song and dance about how Calzaghe's opposition is underrated. But at the end of the day, everyone always asks who Joe beat. And I think he's beaten better people than Tyson. Theoretically, Joe should have a greater legacy. But if we're factoring in "impact" and box office, then Tyson would win. More people will know Tyson in 100 years, no doubt. Is that right? I dunno.

Mike dated this: http://mrsgrapevine.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/naomi_bik.jpg

Right or wrong, Tyson's impact on the sport overall will still obviously be greater. But as much as people shit on Joe's resume, Tyson's is pretty shite counting the wins only. no he made them look that way just like RJJ did

legacy wise NC Tyson way over Calzaghe . . .

i voted tyson because obviously he had a massive impact on the sport and the media, i sorta thought you meant legacy in that way...... but as for resume and achievments, quite close both have rather shite resumes really, but tyson never really beat anyone that good and at least joe beat an old, but still dangerous b-hop i really dont like joe much, but as for achievments, quality of wins and consistency....joe is the better fighter What about Larry Holmes? Tyson knocked him cold. Holmes was past his prime and coming off a layoff, but Larry wasn't a shot fighter either...just like Hopkins wasn't shot. Larry Holmes, after he was KFTO, would go on to fight some good HWs of the 90's. Even though he lost, he put up a tough fight against Mercer, which went the distance. He fought and lost to a prime Holyfield in 12 rounds, but he wasn't out-classed. He did go on to beat Oliver McCall in 1995, who I shall point out, Oliver would go on to beat Lennox Lewis for the Title. I don't hold the Holmes victory as much, but if you are brining in a 43 year old, past prime fighter, who was a Middle-weight 98% of his career, then I'm brining in Larry Holmes who was not only younger than Bernard when he fought Tyson (although we can discuss age later), but was one of the all time great HWs, and went on to have a decent career after he was KFTO by Tyson. Mike Tyson vs. Larry Holmes, with some good comments on the video about Legacy of Tyson.

I think Tyson has by far the better legacy than CalSlappy...... He was thee Undisputed Champ, something CalSlappy would never dream of or have the balls of becoming

Tyson... Threads like this make people hate Calzaghe and white fighters in general. No, just Calzaghe.

As its often asked about Joe................who did Tyson beat? Let's look at some of the facts: Joe fought at 168 and fought fighters only at 168. Not a stretch, is it? OK, he fought a Bernard Hopkins and now Roy Jones Jr., two past prime fighters, one shot to pieces, and two former Middle-weights. Joe has great wins against Lacy and Kessler. Tyson: 5'10, 220. Just about everybody was bigger than him; not much credit though since he is in the HW division. Tyson was 20 when he won the title and went on to unify the title in a short period of time. How long did it take Joe? His best win was against Spinks even though it wasn't his toughest fight. I always give Tyson big props for this win for a few reasons: Spinks was a great light heavyweight Champion who moved up and beat Larry Holmes, even though Holmes was past his prime. Spinks was undefeated going into the Tyson bout and many considered him the lineal Champion. Spinks was in the low 200's and Mike was the "bigger" man for the bout but Spinks still was taller than Mike. Spinks got KFTO in 90 seconds. Key point with Spinks: Rocky Marciano by many lists from historians is considered an all time great, but yet, who did he beat? He beat former middle-weights and light-heavyweights that fought as Heavyweights, and they still weighed less than 200 pounds. Marciano had tough fights against these opponents, while Tyson, KFTO Michael Spinks, an all time great at LH in 90 seconds. But then again, I always say it was OK for Marciano to fight them because, he had no other choice, and, he himself was only 185 pounds...but as long as we put him on the HW All time Great list....here we are. What Joe has over Tyson is keeping it together and sticking with what got him there: his Father/trainer. But hell, he didn't have to deal with 25% of what Tyson had to deal with. I wonder how Joe would have dealt with the pressures...especially at Mike's age. Mike declined as soon as he got rid of Rooney...we saw this with his fight with Bruno, despite the KO win. You also have to remember that Popularity has a lot to do with Legacy. The HW division was in the toilet for ratings. When Tyson came on to the scene, he was a World Wide Phenom.

This is a joke thread right?? it has to be...who in their right mind would actually not know that answer to this question? Iron Mike is an iconic legend in the sport....Calzaghe is a good fighter....nuff said! You don't know the answer still. America thinks the world revolves around America.

I got 150k on RJ. any takers? PM me if you want it.