Not Only Does Mike Tyson Not Belong As A Top Ten HW, He's Not Even Close

This sums it up perfectly. How Good Was/Is Mike Tyson? By Frank Scoblete 30 January 2000* Now that Mike Tyson's career is almost over, it might be of interest to take a cold hard look at just how good he was at his best to get some idea of where he stands in the rankings of the great heavyweight champions. It is not a stretch to say that much of the fearsome Tyson persona of a decade or more ago was media hype and was little related to what he actually accomplished in the ring or against whom he accomplished it. We can make a case that Tyson fought "never-wases" and "nothing-lefters" in his early career culminating with his knockout over an intimidated former light-heavyweight champion Michael Spinks, whose only real claim to fame was "winning" two controversial decisions against an aging and distracted Larry Holmes. Other than the light-hitting, terrified Spinks and the out-of-shape, intimidated, comebacking, former great Larry Holmes, who did Tyson actually fight in his pre-prison days who was truly any good in absolute terms? If we measure competition based on who Ali faced, then who of all Tyson's pre-prison opponents was as good as Jerry Quarry, Oscar Bonavena, Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, Ernie Shavers, Joe Bugner, Mac Foster, Floyd Patterson, Zora Foley, Cleveland Williams, Jimmy Ellis, Bob Foster or Ernie Terrell, not to mention the awesome likes of all-time greats Sonny Liston, George Foreman or Smokin' Joe Frazier? Would you classify Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker, Trevor Berbick or Frank Bruno with any those other fighters? Only if you never saw them fight!* The only*real*fight the pre-prison Tyson ever had was against the only decent heavyweight fighter he fought, a determined, well-conditioned Buster Douglas -- and Tyson was roundly beaten, battered and knocked out! That was Tyson in his prime, against a fighter who went on to "extinguish" himself by being knocked out in three rounds by Evander Holyfield. If the pre-prison Tyson's boxing worth must be looked at with some skepticism, then the post-prison Tyson must be looked upon with scorn. Often in boxing, the true greatness of a fighter is not actually known when he is in his prime as he defeats opponent after opponent rather convincingly. It is only after he ages, slows down, and gets himself into wars are we aware of just how good the fighter is -- and was!* Certainly that was true of Ali. Before he made his comeback from an almost four-year forced layoff, there were all sorts of questions about his ability. Could he take a punch? Had he been beating up washed-up fighters? Did he have courage? Would he dog it if he were ever in a real fight? The layoff slowed Ali down, made him more vulnerable. What's more, great fighters appeared in that time, fighters better than any he had previously fought!* So a somewhat diminished Ali met each and every challenger -- starting with a comeback fight against highly ranked Jerry Quarry and then a second fight against vicious number-one contender Oscar Bonavena. His first career loss to Joe Frazier in his third comeback fight proved he could take a punch and that he had mountains of courage. That fight was the first of several "wars" Ali would fight in this second part of his career.* His next loss was to Ken Norton. Fighting 11 rounds with a broken jaw, Ali merely proved again that he was as courageous as any fighter who ever lived. His great victories against these very same fighters and his upset win over the god-like Foreman, showed what a great fighter he was -- and how much greater he had been*before*his layoff! Not so with Tyson. His "layoff" was heralded with a return to the ring against a rank amateur, Peter McNeeley, whom Tyson "destroyed" with a wild flurry in round one. This same McNeeley was later knocked out by the bloated Butterbean in one round and has since lost just about every real fight he's had! And what of Buster Mathis, Jr., Bruce "I was knocked out by a gust of air" Seldon, Francois Botha, or Julian Francis? Are they credible opponents? Only if elephants can fly. The only real fight the post-prison Tyson had of any significance was against Evander Holyfield, who was selected because he appeared to be a shot fighter, having lost two out of three to the disappointing Riddick Bowe. Had Tyson known that Holyfield was not a shot fighter, but actually the only great heavyweight of the 1990s, I'm sure he would have selected a different fighter to beat, perhaps a third go-round with the overrated Razor Ruddock who proved himself a worthy Tyson contender by being knocked out in one round by the otherwise cautious Lennox Lewis. So here we have a very simple yardstick for measuring the greatness of Mike Tyson. He fought two hard fights, one pre-prison and one post-prison -- both of which he lost (subsequently, he ate his way to a third loss and fouled himself into a no-decision). The rest of his victories, pre-prison and post-prison, were over fighters who couldn't make the "C" list during Ali's tenure. So where does that put him on the list of all-time greats?* It doesn't. He doesn't belong. He's not even in the top 20! If you think of the very few good heavyweight fighters who have plied their trade in the late 1980s and 1990s, it is a short list: Evander Holyfield, George Foreman (oh, yes, the Big George who fought Holyfield would have rocked Iron Mike just as he did Smokin' Joe), Riddick Bowe, and maybe Lennox Lewis and Michael Moorer. Tyson only fought one of them, and lost. The others he avoided. I do not, as some writers do, lament the fact that Mike Tyson never lived up to his potential. In fact, I believe he did live up to it, fully, completely. His potential just wasn't all that great and that's what he became -- not all that great.

Well I did say that in my post. I think Tyson was very well schooled, but he did still have his faults. I think Tyson had problem with bigger, longer fighters. He went the distance against Bone Crusher Smith and Razor Ruddock. Both hit him a lot and they were tough fights. I just think when you look at the complete list of HW that have ever fought, there's no way I can put him top 10 as some do. He was a hell of a fighter, devastating puncher, and incredible character outside the ring. Tyson will always be that feared monster just destroying people but let's remember the era he did it in. It's the same reason I think Roy Jones is slightly overrated, he never had much competition in his prime to really give us that defining fight. In my opinion his biggest flaw was his lack of inside game . Tyson vs Tillis is an example . Tillis spoiled and clinched a bit, but what striked me the most was Tyson's inability to fight on the inside or out of a clinch . At mid range Mike was phenomenal, but he lacked inside game if you ask me. Also Holyfield took advantage of it, albeit vs a different version of Tyson.

Has no business? It's heavyweight boxing, anything can happen. Speaking on that, Vitali was a last minute replacement for the fight and he did have a good showing but he wasn't there yet, he got horribly cut and the fight was over. True anything can happen in boxing as you always have a punchers chance, but lennox chin was always suspect to me. And if Vitali was indeed a last minute replacement then why not prepare for him and prove that it was a fluke by beating him in a rematch? By retiring after the fight you create more doubt than anything. Also when he fought Holyfield and Tyson they were well past their prime and I truly believe that the results would have been different had he faced them in their primes. There is no denying that Lennox had an exceptional skill set for a hw, but throughout his career he left many doubts for me and I feel like everytime he was on the verge of greatness he did something questionable(Mcall, Rahman, Klitchko).

I agree , it was Iron Mike's way to quit . 14th or 15th in an ATG list is a very good ranking , I don't argue with that either. What I disagree with is your analysis of Tyson as a fighter. In the early stages of his carreer he wasn't only a bully with a big punch . Head and upper body movements, feints , bob and weave , combination punching , choice of punches , speed, balance, discipline and work ethics. I think Cus D'Amato did a great job with young Tyson, even with his personality. If I remember he was not aggressive at all. He was a polite guy , shy even. I remember a TV show in which he was almost scared to sit next to Ali and ...i think it was SRR? ...not sure. However, the Iron Mike persona was created later , gradually. After going to jail though Tyson was pretty much the fighter you described: undisciplined, dirty , relying on his power which in my opinion wasn't even so amazing without speed and superbe conditioning. Well I did say that in my post. I think Tyson was very well schooled, but he did still have his faults. I think Tyson had problem with bigger, longer fighters. He went the distance against Bone Crusher Smith and Razor Ruddock. Both hit him a lot and they were tough fights. I just think when you look at the complete list of HW that have ever fought, there's no way I can put him top 10 as some do. He was a hell of a fighter, devastating puncher, and incredible character outside the ring. Tyson will always be that feared monster just destroying people but let's remember the era he did it in. It's the same reason I think Roy Jones is slightly overrated, he never had much competition in his prime to really give us that defining fight.

Has no business? It's heavyweight boxing, anything can happen. Speaking on that, Vitali was a last minute replacement for the fight and he did have a good showing but he wasn't there yet, he got horribly cut and the fight was over. Vitali was winning on the scorecards at the time of the stoppage. Lennox Louis just got lucky by winning with a cut stoppage. On to the topic of Tyson, I think a lot of you are underrating him and saying he was just a brawler when he had a great defense as well as power. http://i.imgur.com/J4MC4p5.gif

I love Tyson, but even I could admit he's not a top 10 HW. If he never lost to Douglas & beat Holyfield than maybe he would be. The thing is after 1990 his heart wasn't into fighting anymore. It was just a paycheck for him. If he never went to prison & still had the passion for fighting through the 1990s than he easily would make the top 10.

I honestly feel we never got to see the best of Mike, when Cus died Mike was still learning the science and was still a raw talent. After Cus died Mike should have never left Kevin Rooney cause when he joined Don King that was the beginning of the end. Never have I ever seen a "PROMOTER" control every aspect of a fighters life from business to personal, I feel as though Don King robbed us of one the great talents in boxing history. The most important thing for a boxer to have is focus, and clearly Mike wasn't focused when he was with King. Say what you want about Mike but he was an exceptional talent and I really don't see a problem with him being on a top 10 hw list, but I can also see why people wouldn't have him on there list.

Tyson declined when he stopped jabbing to set up his deadly arensal of punches. The first Bruno fight was the beginning of his fall...

I think people bring up good points about Tysons power. Now, while it was very good, it was his hand speed and combination punching combined with the power that was the deal. His decline was when he "lost" that, and relied, to me, almost exclusively on his power. It could have because of competition, age, or decline from various things. But the young Iron Mike was electric. He'd rip a two hooks to the body, throw one up stairs, get tagged, and set up again. Quick. And that was your ass, Mr. Postman. Low center of gravity, and I think great core strength. The man had some pretty solid wheels underneath him as well. Tyson was a physically very powerful man, that got taught early by a master that saw what his gifts were. Could have a best Tyson beat the best Lewis? Probably not. And I'm good with that. I think Lewis is one of the greatest HW's of all time. I never had that limey fuck's video game. Doe.:lol1:

That's exactly what it was, a cowardly act and it amazes me that you would defend such a low act in the ring like that. The reason Tyson bit Holyfield, was because he couldn't beat him. This idea that Tyson fans say about Holyfield using his head and fighting dirty is a complete joke. Tyson was one of the most dirty fighters ever. I saw him try and break Frans Botha's arm, hit many fighters after the bell, fight them in the press conference and of course the famous Tyson elbows. Holyfield was the first fighter to really bully the bully. He wasn't taking any of that sh1t from Tyson and pushed back. When Tyson realized he couldn't win, he looked for a way out and he bit him. It was the definition of a cowardly act. Sorry but the 80's and early 90's were not a good time for HW. The talent was marginal at best. He unified the title by beating Pinkland Thomas, Trevor Berbick and Tony Tubbs if I'm not mistaken. Not really legendary names when you compare the HW division to previous decades. You cannot clearly say that and you severely underestimate Holyfields ability to fight. Tyson may have been better schooled in terms of head movement, and the Cus Demato style, but Holyfield was a great inside fighter and his resume is better than Tysons. His wars with Bowe alone show the heart that beats in that mans chest. Holyfield IMO was twice the fighter that Tyson was, and it's not even close. You had to kill Holyfield to beat him, and his chin was iron. Again, I loved watching Tyson even though I was never a fan of his. He was one of the most devastating punchers ever, but that doesn't mean he was top 10. His opposition was marginal at best, he folded in the biggest fights of his career, he was undisciplined and was suffered the worst upset in the history of boxing. Tyson IMO was a about 14-15th on my list of all time HW's last time I made a list. I agree , it was Iron Mike's way to quit . 14th or 15th in an ATG list is a very good ranking , I don't argue with that either. What I disagree with is your analysis of Tyson as a fighter. In the early stages of his carreer he wasn't only a bully with a big punch . Head and upper body movements, feints , bob and weave , combination punching , choice of punches , speed, balance, discipline and work ethics. I think Cus D'Amato did a great job with young Tyson, even with his personality. If I remember he was not aggressive at all. He was a polite guy , shy even. I remember a TV show in which he was almost scared to sit next to Ali and ...i think it was SRR? ...not sure. However, the Iron Mike persona was created later , gradually. After going to jail though Tyson was pretty much the fighter you described: undisciplined, dirty , relying on his power which in my opinion wasn't even so amazing without speed and superbe conditioning.

I think you misunderstood me a little bit. I'm just saying, I don't think I've ever seen prime tyson crumble. You can say what you want about him, but he took his beatings like a man. He certainly didn't coward out. He took some severe beatings against Douglas, Lewis and some of the later fights in his career, and to some extent Holyfield one as well. He could have quit at any moment, but he took his beatings. He did bite Holyfield's ear, but that was more frustration than anything else - I certainly wouldn't call it cowardice. Mind you, Holyfield also bit someone once. It can happen to anyone. That's exactly what it was, a cowardly act and it amazes me that you would defend such a low act in the ring like that. The reason Tyson bit Holyfield, was because he couldn't beat him. This idea that Tyson fans say about Holyfield using his head and fighting dirty is a complete joke. Tyson was one of the most dirty fighters ever. I saw him try and break Frans Botha's arm, hit many fighters after the bell, fight them in the press conference and of course the famous Tyson elbows. Holyfield was the first fighter to really bully the bully. He wasn't taking any of that sh1t from Tyson and pushed back. When Tyson realized he couldn't win, he looked for a way out and he bit him. It was the definition of a cowardly act. I agree about the part about him coming through at the perfect time for sure, but he still faced some good opposition who gave him some good fights and he did achieve some things no one else did. Sorry but the 80's and early 90's were not a good time for HW. The talent was marginal at best. He unified the title by beating Pinkland Thomas, Trevor Berbick and Tony Tubbs if I'm not mistaken. Not really legendary names when you compare the HW division to previous decades. I agree it's his own fault, but it's just reasoning. I still don't think there's any question that Tyson was undoubtedly the more talented fighter. I really can't see how anyone could dispute that. You cannot clearly say that and you severely underestimate Holyfields ability to fight. Tyson may have been better schooled in terms of head movement, and the Cus Demato style, but Holyfield was a great inside fighter and his resume is better than Tysons. His wars with Bowe alone show the heart that beats in that mans chest. Holyfield IMO was twice the fighter that Tyson was, and it's not even close. You had to kill Holyfield to beat him, and his chin was iron. Also, he's undoubtedly a top 20 heavyweight. Anything else would be criminal. I think you'd be hard pressed not to include him in the top 15 as well, whether you think he's overrated or not. He did achieve some pretty incredible things. Again, I loved watching Tyson even though I was never a fan of his. He was one of the most devastating punchers ever, but that doesn't mean he was top 10. His opposition was marginal at best, he folded in the biggest fights of his career, he was undisciplined and was suffered the worst upset in the history of boxing. Tyson IMO was a about 14-15th on my list of all time HW's last time I made a list.

Ali > Wlad in every way. Resume, skills, entertainment, personality - whatever you choose. That's case closed. Hmm... Not sure. I don't know what would happen in that fight. As with most tyson fantasy fights, if Ali (who did have a tremendous chin), went past 4-5 rounds, I would heavily favour him. Wladimir would never be ALLOWED to face opponents as bad as Ali's. I half of them would have even been "illegal" under the current rules of boxing and most of the others had records so bad they wouldn't have a ranking high enough to even dream of Wlad. And so your saying that Tyson who is more skilled, faster, more powerful, more defensive/aggressive, better chin, everything than Ali, an opponent like none again he ever faced, could not outbox Ali? HA. And Ali never wore a punch in his entire career like Tysons let alone in combination. You cant rate his chin as good against that calibre of opponent. Assuming Ali could last half the fight is laughable in itself. Watch Tyson Ratliff. That's ya Muhammad Ali!

Yes yes there's that too haha But atleast Wlad usually got the knockout didn't he and atleast Wlad dominated his opponents. And what was the average weight of an Ali opponent again? 200lbs CW. And Wlad's? 235lbs. And what sort of record did Ali's opponents have again on average? BUM records. And Wlad's? Unbeaten and nearly unbeaten. Case closed :) But let's keep this on topic. Tyson right. I venture this Laced Up.. I think if Tyson fought Muhammad Ali.. For real.. He would have caught the running man Ali within 3 rounds and badly and easily knocked him out without any real damage whatsoever. Something in the spirit of Tyson vs Ratliff was.. What do you have to say to that? ;) Ali > Wlad in every way. Resume, skills, entertainment, personality - whatever you choose. That's case closed. Hmm... Not sure. I don't know what would happen in that fight. As with most tyson fantasy fights, if Ali (who did have a tremendous chin), went past 4-5 rounds, I would heavily favour him.

:lol1: :lol1: What we know is that nobody INSIDE boxing, would pay to watch Wlad clinch, hold and lean his way to boring wins over overmatched opponents. Yes yes there's that too haha But atleast Wlad usually got the knockout didn't he and atleast Wlad dominated his opponents. And what was the average weight of an Ali opponent again? 200lbs CW. And Wlad's? 235lbs. And what sort of record did Ali's opponents have again on average? BUM records. And Wlad's? Unbeaten and nearly unbeaten. Case closed :) But let's keep this on topic. Tyson right. I venture this Laced Up.. I think if Tyson fought Muhammad Ali.. For real.. He would have caught the running man Ali within 3 rounds and badly and easily knocked him out without any real damage whatsoever. Something in the spirit of Tyson vs Ratliff was.. What do you have to say to that? ;)

Simply not true! Nobody OWNED a television back in those days to even watch Dempsey. Nobody outside of boxing would PAY to fall asleep watching Ali run around barely even fighting for 15 rounds and rarely ever really score a proper knockdown. You can't compare these 2 cans to Tyson! :lol1: :lol1: What we know is that nobody INSIDE boxing, would pay to watch Wlad clinch, hold and lean his way to boring wins over overmatched opponents.

I don't know about Holyfield in the top ten all time at HW. He's more of a P4P great fighter. I think Holy loses to many HWs of the past, including the ones he "beat" Foreman and Holmes. Look at his HW career in which he was bested by Bowe and Lewis....he was never the man or dominate. We seem to love the guy because of his warrior spirit and the way he reinvented himself over and over again. Also getting back to Tyson and Holyfield....I think both lose to each other at a certain time in their careers. Tyson beats Holyfield anywhere before 89 and Holy after that. Holy needed that physical strength he developed later by lifting weights with Lee Haney to hold off Tyson on the inside... I often thought similarly about the complementary periods of Tyson and Holyfield beating each other. However I think both Holyfield and Tyson beat every boxer who ever came before them without much doubt at all. If you analyse Ali's fights properly he really deserves about 10 losses as well making his record comparable to Holyfield's in reality. Except Holyifeld never lost to a bum. Except Holyfield never lost to a green. Except Holyifeld never lost to a CW. Except Holyfield was never knocked down or stopped by anything less than a monstrous opponent. And most importantly, Holyfield's opposition was about 10x better and stronger than Ali faced. As for Foreman and Holmes? Their younger, more athletic versions were also much lighter (Holmes was smaller than Holyfield and Foreman only 5lbs heavier!) And far less experienced (Foreman was dropped by featherfists Ali and Young and went even matched with pure slugger Lyle) who were nothing compared with Holyfield. And Holmes struggled badly with C level champs like Witherspoon and Norton and got pasted by bums like Shaver's. **** a primish Holmes lost 2ce to Spinks who would be a sparring partner for Holyfield! Holyfield was better than all that came before. Holyfield's own words!

So did Jack Dempsey. So did Ali and many others. Simply not true! Nobody OWNED a television back in those days to even watch Dempsey. Nobody outside of boxing would PAY to fall asleep watching Ali run around barely even fighting for 15 rounds and rarely ever really score a proper knockdown. You can't compare these 2 cans to Tyson!

I agree. paper ratings don't mean much. he made his mark by putting even non boxing fans in there seats. will never forget the anticipation before a Tyson fight even tho you knew it wasn't going to last long in most cases. Tyson was a beat atg or not So did Jack Dempsey. So did Ali and many others.

I don't know about Holyfield in the top ten all time at HW. He's more of a P4P great fighter. I think Holy loses to many HWs of the past, including the ones he "beat" Foreman and Holmes. Look at his HW career in which he was bested by Bowe and Lewis....he was never the man or dominate. We seem to love the guy because of his warrior spirit and the way he reinvented himself over and over again. Also getting back to Tyson and Holyfield....I think both lose to each other at a certain time in their careers. Tyson beats Holyfield anywhere before 89 and Holy after that. Holy needed that physical strength he developed later by lifting weights with Lee Haney to hold off Tyson on the inside...

I think Jersey Joe and Ezzard Charles were great too, but I have a problem with ranking them as top tier heavies when they really spent the majority of their careers in another or multiple other weightclass. Pretty much every one of Walcott's fights were at heavyweight. He had like 5 below heavyweight at the very start of his career.