Should Tyson's controversies outside the Ring lower him in top 10 rankings?

[Great John L]

I know that this topic has a broad and diverse range of opinions. Do you think that, like some fighters out of ring events can escalate them(Louis and Ali), Tyson's should lower him in Heavyweight history rankings/lists?

In some ways out of ring events don't matter as the sport is all about the fighting and that's hence how a fighter should be judged. But sometimes the way a fighter affects the population in his time is important, like how Louis and Ali were reveered heroes. Their image and what they do as human beings gives them that additional aura of greatness. But Tyson's image was often negative, stereotyped, and hated by the public, at least in later years. With his bad ring behavior, **** case, earbiting, cursing at interviewers, and his out of control life with the drugs, etc.

So, in your opinion, should Mike Tyson's image and controversies outside the Ring lower him in Heavyweight lists? And do you think that the way a fighter behaves outside the Ring should affect his standing in rankings/listings.

[katsidis]

IMO, probably not. I don't think that what a fighter does outside of the ring should effect their rankings. Although I can understand and have no problem with anyone that does downgrade fighters depending on what they do outside the ring.

[Scott9945]

Absolutely not. If you are making boxing ratings, they should be based entirely on boxing. Although in Mike's case there are some in ring incidents that can't be ignored.

[Joeyzagz]

His work INSIDE the ring should lower him in top 10 rankings.

Mike Tyson never defeated a single top contemporary in his era. Lost to Holyfield, ducked Lewis for a decade, and never fought Rid**** Bowe.

His controversies and popularity outside the ring help his standing, not hurt it.

[Barn]

Definitely not, it shouldn't but, sometimes peoples bias does take it into account.

[SNVDoublePunch!]

In no way. It has no bearing on him as a fighter and none of how I rate a boxer has anything non-boxing related to do with it. Besides, look how many things can happen that never come out. If you were to rate fighters, inexplicably and irrationally on personal lives as well, you could be penalizing one guy for what he did publicly while not penalizing another guy who did the same thing that was never made public. Or you could be wrongfully punishing a guy if he turns out not to be guilty of whatever. It's just silly. Maybe Robinson wasn't the greatest on your list because he supposedly beat his wife into a few miscarriages. Does LaMotta's admitedly raping at least two women and attempting murder one or two or more times make him less of a middleweight great? What the hell are we talign about here?

[Kid McCoy]

No he should be judged solely as a fighter. If you rate boxers based on how they conducted themselves outside the ring then about half the inductees of the Hall of Fame ought to be booted out.

[Wild Blue Yonda]

Tyson's career can come under plenty of scrutiny for its own lack of strength & potential realised. No need to press home any dislike by bringing outer-ring exploits into it.

[Canelo Phresh]

no real boxing fans care about boxing not weather or not there role model material.

[CarlosG815]

If you are to take the bad that a fighter does outside the ring and factor it into his legacy, then you will have to take the obstacles they overcome and factor that in as well.