Could somebody defend Mike Tyson as an ATG for me?

[SBleeder]

- Was on pace to shatter most records ... Mike was en route to breaking Marciano's 49-0 record, and Joe Louis' 25 title defense record

I told myself that I wasn't going to post in this thread, but I just can't let this one go:

How in the sam hill is 37-0 with 2 successful defenses of the lineal title "on pace" to shatter Marciano's and Louis' records?

Heck, even if you consider the alphabet belts to be "the world title", he would have had to win sixteen consecutive fights after Carl Williams to tie Louis' record.

TysonBomb=TysonNutrider

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

No one has ever accomplished what Tyson did since his departure ... even if he reigned for a relatively "short" amount of time

-Youngest heavyweight champion ever and the second fastest after L Spinks to become champion, in terms of fights and time as a professional ... Mike became heavyweight champ after 27 fights and a year after he turned pro

-First to unify all of the heavyweight titles and become undisputed champion in an era with multiple titles ... to this day no one has ever won each of the major titles when they were completely scattered and nearly each diifferent title held by a different champions ... Wlad is the closest but hasn't won them all

-First undisputed heavyweight champion since L Spinks .. nearly a decade without an undisputed champion until Mike defeated his brother, Michael Spinks

- Was on pace to shatter most records ... Mike was en route to breaking Marciano's 49-0 record, and Joe Louis' 25 title defense record

- Came back and won two heavyweight titles even after being inactive and incarcerated for 4 years

No one else made the kind of impact that Tyson did, since his departure. He was untouchable for the 5 years he was at his best. There has never been a heavyweight the same combination of power, speed, durability, and skill.

If Tyson isn't an ATG then there are no ATG in boxing ... the plateau he reached has probably only been reached by a few fighters in history .. completely tearing through the heavyweight division like it was nothing and destroying guys effortlessly. Not to mention how prolific he was ... fighting on an average of a fight per month. Truly the LAST great heavyweight champion ever.

thanks for the post!!!!!!!!! will take this into thought!!!!!!!!!!

[BennyST]

-First to unify all of the heavyweight titles and become undisputed champion in an era with multiple titles ... to this day no one has ever won each of the major titles when they were completely scattered and nearly each diifferent title held by a different champions ... Wlad is the closest but hasn't won them all


- Was on pace to shatter most records ... Mike was en route to breaking Marciano's 49-0 record, and Joe Louis' 25 title defense record

There has never been a heavyweight the same combination of power, speed, durability, and skill.

If Tyson isn't an ATG then there are no ATG in boxing ... the plateau he reached has probably only been reached by a few fighters in history .. completely tearing through the heavyweight division like it was nothing and destroying guys effortlessly. Not to mention how prolific he was ... fighting on an average of a fight per month. Truly the LAST great heavyweight champion ever.

Some of these point are just silly. Talking about being the first to unify in an era of multiple titles isn't something amazing that no one had achieved before. It is absolutely no different than beating the two top contenders and then beating the champion in an earlier era. It is no different than what any lineal champion has done. That is not a point to put him above anyone.

It's actually still arguable whether he was even the heavyweight champion at all, until he beat Spinks...in '88 at 22. He was a champion. Spinks had never lost his titles and was still the lineal heavyweight champion. He was the champion.

Just like Roy Jones Jr didn't actually become the first guy in 100 hundred years to become the middleweight and heavyweight champions. He was never the champion, just a champion in a silly era full of pointless titles and 'champions' that weren't actually champions, which is no different in previous eras to simply being a top contender. He didn't beat Lewis, thus didn't become the first guy since Fitz to do it. He never did it.

Also, the fact is that he won the main title off Spinks. The other two opponents both won their titles in vacant title fights only one fight before. They were just titles floating around because Holmes had dropped them. It means nothing that he unified them in an era of multiple titles. It's not different than beating the champion and a bunch of top contenders, which all champions did.

Still impressive. Not saying it's not. But don't act as if it's something that hasn't been done before constantly throughout boxing history. In reality, he beat a bunch of contenders before finally beating the champion, making two defenses and getting knocked out. That sounds harsh, but it's actually true. That's the problem today. People pick and choose. Someone they don't like is just a paper champion, while some other guy beat a million champions (whether they were won it from vacant title fights or not). It is no different than beating the top contenders in previous eras.

Now, my main point....How in the hell was even remotely close to being 'on pace to shatter most records'? The only record he has ever beaten was becoming the younger heavyweight champion, and that certainly wasn't shattered considering he did it at 20, compared to 21 for Floyd.

But, the records you use were so absurdly far away from Tyson's reach, ever, that saying that is plainly idiotic. He didn't even get slightly close, at all, in any way or form to equaling Louis' record.

Tyson, all up, in any title fight at all, win, lose or draw, lineal or paper, only had 16 championship fights. That is still 9 away from Louis' 25 lineal title defenses.

Mike Tyson only had two lineal defenses across two years.

Joe Louis had 25, that's twenty five, across 13, that's thirteen, years.

Two and two, compared to twenty five and thirteen.

As for getting close to Marciano's? Well, again, just ******. There have been many guys that have gotten much closer. Tyson didn't get remotely close. For crying out loud, he was still 12 fights away from just equaling it, let alone breaking it.

He wouldn't have broken it until fighting Golota, at which point he had been knocked out a couple of times, had a couple of no contests, a disqualification loss....Come on mate.


As for the whole ridiculous debate of Tyson's combination of speed, power, durability and skill...well, that's moronic. Considering he got knocked out in all of his losses, his durability wasn't exactly great. His power was good, speed excellent and his skill wasn't bad. Floyd Patterson also had great speed, power and skill. He was only stopped 5 times, the same as Tyson. Was he the greatest combination of all those?

[The Iron Man]

If Tyson was truly a great fighter he would've rebounded from the Douglass loss and rematched him and beat him. His 80's run wasn't impressive at all, he beat a lhw in Spinks, the Bruno fight was a bad stoppage, the rest of the guys were decent journeymen at best.

The Razor Ruddock fights really showed how mediocre he was. Razor was handing him his ass in the first fight when Tyson got another crap stoppage and the rematch was a life and death struggle. If Tyson hadn't been a rapist he would've been destroyed by Holyfield even earlier. Bowe and Lewis would've also done a job on him, not to mention the resurging Foreman.

I'm not gonna say he was a hypejob because he was obviously dynamic in his style, but his resume speaks for itself.

I suggest you watch those fights again.

[Scott9945]

I suggest you watch those fights again.

Yes. People here having been taking a lot of liberties with history lately. Tyson was always a better fighter than Ruddock and both of their fights indicated that.

[Glamour Puss]

I suggest you watch those fights again.

I've seen them more than once, Ruddock was having his way. The first stoppage was bogus. The second fight was tooth and nail. Tyson was a frontrunner who relied on fear in his opponents, once his mystique was shattered in 1990, he was nothing but a typical powerpunching inside fighter w/ no heart.

His **** case basically prolonged his career, had he not gone in and built up more notoriety, he would've been knocked out again and again and we wouldn't even be talking about him right now.

[joseph5620]

I've seen them more than once, Ruddock was having his way. The first stoppage was bogus. The second fight was tooth and nail. Tyson was a frontrunner who relied on fear in his opponents, once his mystique was shattered in 1990, he was nothing but a typical powerpunching inside fighter w/ no heart.

His **** case basically prolonged his career, had he not gone in and built up more notoriety, he would've been knocked out again and again and we wouldn't even be talking about him right now.

Trolling is not amusing in this section.

[Glamour Puss]

Its funny, I'm starting to think people just haven't seen the Ruddock fights. Ruddock isn't even considered to be a legendary fighter, he was just a good fighter at the time.

Tyson hasn't won a meaningful fight in almost 25 years and I'm the one trolling.

Its time to let your childhood memories go fellas.

[The Iron Man]

I've seen them more than once, Ruddock was having his way. The first stoppage was bogus. The second fight was tooth and nail. Tyson was a frontrunner who relied on fear in his opponents, once his mystique was shattered in 1990, he was nothing but a typical powerpunching inside fighter w/ no heart.

His **** case basically prolonged his career, had he not gone in and built up more notoriety, he would've been knocked out again and again and we wouldn't even be talking about him right now.

There is a case for the first fight stoppage to have been a bit premature but Tyson was dominating that fight, Ruddock had already been down a few times and I am pretty sure Tyson would have finished him there and then if Steele didn't jump in. As for the 2nd fight Tyson won clearly and had a KD (maybe more than one). Many not legendary fighters can test greats its not out of the ordinary but Tyson won both fights clearly.

This whole relying on fear thing is not really true many fighters took it to Tyson and fail (pre and post Douglas). But many fighters did fear him and that should be seen as a positive for him not negative.

As for the Bruno I being a "bogus" stoppage, I really think you need to watch it again. Tyson pretty much took his head off with some savage uppercuts.

Now I'm not preaching him as the GOAT and its fair that his ATG status is not concrete for many but some things going about this thread are ridiculous.

[JAB5239]

To whoever thought Ruddock was beating Tyson.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NdUIQcbRtI