Warhawk46

Heart is more than just winning guys... Tyson, even though he had lost his once incredible skills, by the time he fought Douglas, showed plenty of heart...he never gave up in that fight. He also didnt back down when Razor Ruddock hit him cleanly with many good shots... The Tyson that came out of prison in 1995 did not want to fight. He fought only for the money, not for the love of the sport... It is very apparant in how he acted, how little he trained, and in how he fought. But dont come on here telling me he never had a heart or never had skill like some of you guys have said... You need to watch his earlier fights, not his fights after prison.

Yes, he has a long way to go but he does have some things going for him: he is young, aggressive and athletic with fast hands. He is raw right now, but it would be stupid to rush him into a fight with a really good fighter too quickly. The old-time fighters fought often, like he is doing, and fought a lot of scrubs...they learned from every fight they fought. Although Tyson became the youngest heavyweight champion (which was Cus's primary goal) even he was probably rushed too quickly. Tyson was too young to deal with all that a champion has to deal with (out of the ring...in the ring he was better than anyone ever)and he eventually succumbed to the pressures and pleasures of being on the top of the world at too young an age. Boytov is someone to watch for in the next 2-3 years. He has skills that he is still developing but there is no mistaking his innate agression and and athletic ability.

He did. It has been documented that Mike Tyson weighed 190 lbs (muscular) when he was 13 years old. He really is a genetic freak. He was like a 5'10", 190 lbs seventh grader...all muscle, no fat. As for the starter of this topic, you are a dumbass! There is no way Tyson could make cruiserweight. Also, before posting such an asinine topic, do the research. Someone posted that he has weighed less than 200 lbs for his early fights...bullshit. His lightest weight was 212 lbs against Don Halpin in 1985. He also weighed in at 213 1/2 lbs against Jose Ribalta. He weighed anywhere from 215-220 lbs during his prime. After prison he usually weighed between 219 and 22o lbs. He weighed 222 lbs for the first Holyfield fight. In the rematch he was a ripped 218 lbs and he fought well. In that fight he lost the first round badly, the second was pretty even, and he really dominated Holyfield in the 3rd. Had Tyson not snapped about Holyfield incessent headbutting he might have won that fight. Also, he was most definately NOT fat against Etienne even though he weighed 225 lbs. He was totally ripped, and had very well-defined abs. Some of you guys need to actually have an idea of what you are talking about before posting.

Ummm....how in the hell could you tell what Toney really looked like? He was seated at the table the whole time. His face was fat, as it always is, and his arms were bulging out of his suit. How can you say he looked like a middleweight??? He weighed in over 230 lbs in his last fight! And if we know anything about Toney, its that he gains weight if anything between fights. I'd say he is still around 230 lbs, but really there is no way to tell his weight, other than he well north of 40 lbs over the middleweight limit.

First off, Mike Tyson has huge legs. There is nothing "frail" about his legs, they are trunks! Also, he has always had small looking calves, but they are definately able to hold his weight In my opinion, he has larger arms than 16". maybe back when he started, before he was into lifting weights they were like that, but now they are definately larger. I am 5'10" and I have around 17" arms. Tyson's look larger. Also, Tyson does not have a small frame by any means, he is compact because he is short for a heavyweight (5'11") but he has broad shoulders, and large legs. He has a powerful musculature and skeletal structure. In any case, after he beat McBride, by 2nd round TKO (my prediction), he should take a week off and get right back into the gym for an August fight. He will continue to lose some of the excess weight around his midsection, and could weigh-in around the 225 lbs he weighed for Etienne.

Butterfly, because you seem very young and ignorant, I'll let your "Ali is the greatest because he said so" argument pass. First let me make this very clear to anyone reading: I feel Ali was one of the greatest heavyweights of all-time. There is no denying this; however, it bothers me when uneducated kids come on here and say he was unbeatable and unstoppable, he would "dance circles around (insert all-time great)..." Muhammed Ali, or Cassius Clay, was in trouble against Doug Jones in 1963, a fight for the right to face Champ Sonny Liston. Jones wobbled Ali in this fight, a couple of times. Also, in the fight IMMEDIATELY preceeding Clay's beating of Liston, little Henry Cooper (183 lbs) dropped Ali in the 4th round. Ali was in queer street and his trainer, Angelo Dundee might have saved the future-champ from a stunning defeat by ripping his glove while in the corner, thus ensuring Clay enough time to recover. The fight was stopped on cuts on Cooper the next round. Even after Ali's prime, he received gift decisions against Norton and Lyle, to name a couple. Ali always received a little extra from the judges because of his name. He was supremely talented, but his skills were somewhat lacking. He held his hands too low (knowing he was a much better athlete than a lot of the plodders he fought in the 1960s) pulled back at punches, and also used illegal holding quite a bit in his later career. Against someone of similar athletic skill, he would be in trouble. He always struggled against pressure, swarming-type fighters. This style gave him the most problems. And as for handspeed, I can think of a few heavyweights with similar handspeed. Mike Tyson, for example, actually had quite comparable handspeed. What makes prime Tyson's handspeed more impressive though, is that he threw POWER punches so quickly...Ali's flicking jab and right were very fast; however, Tyson's right to the body, followed by an uppercut was more impressive...he sat on his punches and delivered them nearly as fast, if not as fast as Ali delievered his. Ali is overrated because so many uneducated young fans think he was absolutely unbeatable and had no weaknesses...he did. He is a top three heavyweight of all time, in my opinion; perhaps #1, sometimes it is difficult to decide. However, I dont engage in mindless worship, I have the ability to watch his fights (and have seen damn near every one) and see strengths and weaknesses. Just because some says they are the "greatest" often enough, doesnt mean that they are, without question, the Greatest.

For all the people on here who automatically assume Ali was the greatest just because he said so... Did you know that in Ali's "prime" he was dropped by 180 lbs Henry Cooper? Or that a little man, Doug Jones wobbled him visibly in their fight? This was before he was suspended from boxing... There is this myth that Muhammed Ali was this UNBEATABLE force. He was quite beatable, in fact he has received around four or five GIFT decisions due to his name... Ali called himself the greatest often enough that people started to call him that too, sportwriters caught on to this new breed of athlete...Ali was the first major self-promoter...he brought in the era of the egotistical athlete. He is certainly one of the best heavyweights of all time, but in head-to-head competition, I can forsee a few greats beating him. Let's not get carried away and say his "footwork" would enable him to dance circles around any great, such as Tyson, MArciano, Holmes, Lewis, Holyfield, etc...He got caught during his prime by much, much lesser fighters. Remember, his competition in the 1960s was not so great. By the time he fought Cleveland Williams, Williams was far-removed from his best. Liston threw the second fight. Henry Cooper and Doug Jones had him in trouble. He got pretty good gifts against Lyle and Norton. Chuck Wepner dropped him. Ali was an all-time great, but I dont blindly buy into the hype that he easily beats any one on any day as so many uninformed fans do.

So, Butterfly...and I am addressing you because you are the one who is blindly worshipping Ali here... When was Ali's prime...it was only a three month period in 1967? Because he fought two fights in '67. No, on the contrary, Ali WAS in his prime when he fought Sonny Liston, and also the few fights preceding this. He was in his prime up until he was suspended. It is quite obvious you know very little about this subject. What you are able to do, and do well, is keep repeating Ali is the Greatest because he "could float like a butterfly" and was unhittable in his (two month) Prime. You are just as bad as the Tyson nuthuggers who say his Prime was his fight against Michael Spinks...Tyson's prime was a bit longer than that, and Ali's was longer than his three month, two fight period in 1967.

Sure he doesnt have the dense muscle an athlete will have...Foxx looks like he trains on a Bowflex...but he is the best choice out there to play Tyson. I think he would do better than Michael Jai White did in the 1995 TV film TYSON

C'mon guys...give Sly his due. The guy is 5'8". Its been documented. That said, I say they gotta go with Tyson. Tyson needs some money (he always does) and this would ensure ticket sales... Imagine the poster at the marquee...Stallone/Tyson...Rocky VI! It would drive interest in the movie...Tyson has been washed up since prison. After he came out of prison, his career, his skills and ring work, have been nothing. Yet, he still sold more tickets and PPV sales than anyone... Tyson should be in Rocky VI

Pretty sure Jamie Fox is around the same height as Mike Tyson...who knows he may be shorter. It seems a lot of actors are not very tall. Look him up on IMDB

I looked for this fight on the TV schedule but didnt see it. Are they reairing on FSN?

You guys, Holyfield was not a light-heavyweight champion...he won the Cruiserweight belt and the Heavyweight belt. By the way, during their respective primes I have to go with Tyson. Even though he didnt have the lasting power of the other two he was superior during his prime. Holyfield deserves his recognition of the term "warrior" but be aware he gets this label for being in wars. He has had many ring wars. Tyson, during his prime, was unstoppable. It is ignorant to say if he didnt knock a guy out he lost, just as it is ignorant to say he lost to every guy that could take his power. He has a handful of decision victories and it should be noted that during his prime he could basically "shut out" and opponent even if he didnt knock him out. I cant remember the last time a havyweight fighter was that hard to hit. And Tyson had to be in close because of his size, and still he was so hard to hit cleanly. In fact, he was only hit by very good punches a handful of times before he fired Rooney. Afterwards, his defense was much worse.

Doesnt Klitchko have a 78" reach? I could swear this is what it was, perhaps even an 80". One thing is for sure, I know his reach is not the same as Mike Tyson's (71")

Thats more like it. I couldnt remember if it was 78" or 80", all I know is he has quite a bit longer reach than Iron Mike, who had a 71" reach

Ok, a couple things: KidAchillies has a point in that body types do not automatically determine what type of fighting will be effective, or what type of skills a fighter will have. However, he is flat-out wrong when he says Tyson couldnt fight inside. Of course he could, and he did. True, he would let himself get tied up at times, but often he would wail away with combos, reload and hit again. This is VERY effective infighting...just because the fighters heads arent touching the whole time does not, DOES NOT, mean it is not effective infighting... Tyson took away Tyrell Biggs legs by banging the body...and Biggs could move around like Ali (before somebody cries blasphemy, Biggs could move like Ali...not saying he was as good, just that he was just as fast and fluid on his feet). Tyson pounded Ferguson's body for several rounds. He spent half his fight against Razor Ruddock hitting the body, taking out Ruddocks legs. Watch his fights before saying he can't work the body or infight. And by watch his fights, I speak about the 80s fights...nothing from after prison because that Tyson was merely a shell of the man: he was much farther gone than Holyfield was at that point.

Its popular to say the heavyweight division has been bad since the 1970s...but on the other hand, the 70s are glorified more than they ought to be. In all honesty, there was comparable talent in the 80s and 90s. Besides Ali, Frazier and Foreman in the seventies what other all-time greats?? The late 80s and 90s had Tyson, Lewis and Holyfield, three all-time greats. As far as the supporting casts of both eras....the 70s had Norton, Quarry, Shavers, Lyle, etc... The 80s and 90s had Bowe, Ruddock, Morrison, Tucker, Bonecrusher Smith, etc. Throw in Larry Holmes in both decades (as he was really good in both, and actually still very good when Tyson destroyed him as he proved by fighting well against top-10 later) and you have a strong era in heavyweight boxing. The problem and the misconception is in the fights that were made. The 1970s had many more memorable fights, and this goes a long way in influencing opinions. In the 1970s, all the big fights were made, for the most part. The later era was plagued by a fractured championship and was missing a few BIG fights that should have been made (re: Tyson-Bowe, Lewis-Bowe, Tyson-Holyfield in 91, etc) As far as talent is considered, they were actually quite close.

Wow, some of you guys are clueless... Of course they used weights. When they say they dont lift weights, it means it is not part of their boxing routine. As one person already pointed out, Roy Jones has quite the home gym at his place in Pensacola. When Jones says I dont train with weights, it means weight training is not a staple of his boxing program. However, he absolutely lifts weights when not at the gym. The same can be applied to young Mike Tyson. I keep seeing people write how he never used weights in his prime. This is not true. In another thread it was pointed out that he used the dumbbells after his boxing routine was finished. Tyson trained with weights, it just wasnt made a staple of his routine. However, he would do it by himself. Remember, even though these guys are boxers, they still understand that being ripped and also having fuller muscle bellies is more appealing than being ripped and looking skinnier. And before someone says those in the lighter weights cant lift because they will get too heavy...remember we are seeing more and more fighters drain themselves to make an unhealthy weight.

But I can gaurantee that the vast majority of guys would want to be ripped AND have some muscle on their frames... Brad Pitt actually looked like he could do something in Troy...thats about it. Even in that movie, he was far form a big guy. Most guys would prefer to have a little muscle on their frames... Bottome Line: These guys used weights, even if it wasnt part of their routine.

Of course he lifted weights, he's smart. Many fighters will say they dont train with weights...why this is I dont know. Maybe their trainer doesnt approve (many "old school" trainers are still stuck in the 50s and in denial; tradition is hard to change)...maybe they think it sounds better if they didnt, who know. All I know is that many top-level fighters nowadays have come to realize the benefits of weight training.

Exactly. It's high time these fighters actually fought at a weight close to their "natural" weight. It is dangerous to cut so much just to come in at the weigh-in at a lower weight, then balloon up to face someone who may be naturally stronger. The point was also made about heavyweights having huge disadvantages all the time. Nobody complains about this. The real danger in gaining weight between the weigh-in and fight for the lower weights is the toll it takes on the body...face it: draining one's self to make weight or ballooning back up after stepping off the scales is not healthy either way. It's time these fighters tucked their chins and fought at the correct weights.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Remember, the author is talking about the "best" Tyson and "best" Liston. What bothers me is when discussing a Prime Tyson people always resort to the "Tyson had no heart" or "Tyson couldnt beat someone who had a jab and stood up to him"... When we talk about Prime Tyson, we talk about someone who could get inside a strong jab, who wasnt intimidated, and who did not give up. This was a man who believed in his abilities that he didnt always try for the KO...example: Mitch Green... The prime Tyson was able to neutralize a strong jab because of his movement...and dont forget Tyson's jab was very effective, very underrated. It allowed him to get inside...he could double and triple it up so quickly... Plus...Whereas when Liston fought he was a huge guy...he would be small compared to most of the guys Tyson fought.

Oh, Sonny would make it through the first round alright. He was a very good fighter; however, he did not have the skills nor size to handle Tyson. Tyson's footwork and defense, two things overlooked when often discussing Tyson, would make the difference here. Both men punched extremely hard and both had great chins. The angles Tyson created through his amazing footwork and the fact that he was as close to unhittable during his prime as anyone ever was would make the difference. Sonny was too slow to keep up with Mike.