Where Does Mike Tyson Rank As An ATG?

[TysonBomb]

I was at McBride. Mike went down without being hit at one point. He was begging to quit in the ring. It was so bad the ref was like "are you getting up?" He was done. I'd never hold it against him, but it happened.

On the initial question, of course Mike is an ATG. he's one of the top 15-20 Heavies of all time. Forget P4P...in a literal sense, that makes him one of the best men to ever lace gloves. Literal matters too. And he was TYSON. Star power and accomplishment in combination was a rare package. He wasn't AS good as some thought he could be but was plenty bad ass enough.

He was done long before the McBride fight.

Also name 15 heavyweights better than Mike Tyson.

As for Tyson vs. Holyfield it has been explained dozens of times, to the point of ad nauseum. Holyfield headbutted and drugged himself to a victory. Its one of the most tainted "wins" in the history of the sport.

The only time Tyson was even visibly hurt was from those headbutts.

Holyfield is a cheater.

[crold1]

How much of SRR at welterweight have you seen?

Tyson had an iron chin and his skill was unparalleled. He could throw any kind of punch from any kind of angle. He also had good footwork and very difficult to hit.

Learn what durability means. Robinson was hurt by Kid Gavilan several times and was even knocked down by Tommy Bell while fighting at welterweight. Tyson was never floored in his prime.



hard to do that when your opponents are just holding on to you trying to survive.

I've seen what there is of Robinson at Welter. That combined with his record fills in the blanks on all the categories you describe. Speed and power off the charts. Skill level ridiculous. Never heard a ten count. One heat stroke stoppage. Lost once in his first 130 or so fights...there's your durability.

I know what durability means. Strictly defined: Able to withstand wear, pressure, or damage. Mike didn't have a lot of it, certainly never to the degree Robinson did. He showed a little against Ruddock but Ruddock ****** at putting punches together.

Sure, Rob got rocked sometimes (so did Mike; see Smith and Tucker; Ruddock the first). Rob got dropped too. He got up and won when he did throughout a huge chunk of his career. Mike never did. Tyson never got dropped in his prime? Oh, yeah, that prime that magically ended the night of the Douglas fight (even though he looked as good as ever against Stewart two fights later). Rob showed everything you note against a fairly ridiculous opp level. In his first two years, Mike beat Trevor Berbick. In his first two years, SRR beat Angott, Servo, Lamotta, and Zivic.

Mike wasn't that hard to hit when his opposition got better. He was very good at finishing guys before they could hit him much. Mike played his part in some of the holding that went on too. It was rare that he consistently fought to get out of clinches. Rob could be hit too. He handled it better over the course of his career.

Mike had some rare gifts. Your comparison to SRR is just off base. No shame in admitting you got carried away. Everyone does it. Continuing to argue this point is just silly.

[crold1]

He was done long before the McBride fight.

Also name 15 heavyweights better than Mike Tyson.

As for Tyson vs. Holyfield it has been explained dozens of times, to the point of ad nauseum. Holyfield headbutted and drugged himself to a victory. Its one of the most tainted "wins" in the history of the sport.

The only time Tyson was even visibly hurt was from those headbutts.

Holyfield is a cheater.

I know he was done before McBride. Just correcting a false characterization.

I wouldn't name 15, but I think that's the right range. I have Mike around 12 All Time at Heavyweight. There are guys in the top ten he could have beat.

As to Holy, Mike was rocked by a shot at the end of the first. He was visibly hurt in the 10th and 11th rounds of the first fight, and in the first round of the second. As to your explanation of his defeats, that's interpretive, and in the case of the juice speculative, at best. he was losing badly without being butted.

[Ray Corso]

Comparing Tyson to Sugar Ray is the dumbest thing ever said here! You really need to step away from your "fanatic" postings!
Tyson was a flawed fighter in main ways like tie ups, and fighting inside. Unless his opponent was on the ropes Tyson hardly ever fought inside!
Don't make compsarisons using Tysons early opponents they were below LOW! in caliber. Mike is a top twenty heavy and thats a pretty good accomplishment for a punk kid from the City who used to beat up old ladys to steal their pockerpockets! If you know the real story why Teddy washed his hands from him that could tell all you need to know about Tyson back then!

He's just know growing up, thabk God!! Stop making him into something he was NOT! Ray

[TysonBomb]

Same regurgitated garbage that isn't worth responding to.

Tyson ate Ruddock's biggest shots and fired back his own. Tony Tucker was a monster puncher but Tyson beat him around the ring for 12 rounds. Bonecrusher Smith, a big puncher, was too scared to even throw anything at Tyson and held on for the entire fight. Frank Bruno was a major league puncher but only seemed to stun Tyson once before being beaten into submission on the ropes. Tyson was never dropped in his prime years and Robinson was.

Tyson wasn't as interested in boxing and even wanted to retire after the 1988 Spinks fight. He fought Douglas when he was practically hung over and was on a diet of nothing but soup to try and get into fighting weight. He wasn't fighting the same as early as the Bruno fight.

Robinson's "off the charts speed and power" ... yeah I'm sure of it. He had speed but he himself didn't think he was that murderous of a puncher. He was fast and accurate with good power.

Mike was more elusive than Robinson and took less punishment.

Go ahead listing fights that you've never even seen in their entirety.

Sorry but Robinson was never top 3 in durability, power, speed, and skill at any weight class at any point in his career. Maybe in 3 out of 4 of those categories at best. Especially when he didn't consider himself to be a huge puncher.

[Ray Corso]

Are you stating that Mike Tyson was better than Sugar Ray Robinson? Ray

[TysonBomb]

Are you stating that Mike Tyson was better than Sugar Ray Robinson? Ray

No I'm just trying to make a point that even the man who is considered the best wasn't as gifted as Mike Tyson.

You can't directly compare two guys who fought decades apart ... with one being at his best at a lower weight class.

[Ray Corso]

Oh no he wasn't he was 90-0 in the amatuers before a defeat then he was 100-0 as a pro before a defeat!!
Mike Tyson couldn't carry Sugars gym bag and I can tell for a fact he would tell you that your a "jerk" for saying such a thing! Now I don't like name calling over the net but honestly to say that Mike was more gifted than Boxing Greatest Talent ever is just ridiculous! best to you, you have alot to learn about the sport and the first thing is to get away from being a fanatic, its stunting your boxing growth.

Also find a current fighter to rout for never mind its probably Floyd hahaha!!
nite all, this is just to silly! Ray

[crold1]

Same regurgitated garbage that isn't worth responding to.

Tyson ate Ruddock's biggest shots and fired back his own. Tony Tucker was a monster puncher but Tyson beat him around the ring for 12 rounds. Bonecrusher Smith, a big puncher, was too scared to even throw anything at Tyson and held on for the entire fight. Frank Bruno was a major league puncher but only seemed to stun Tyson once before being beaten into submission on the ropes. Tyson was never dropped in his prime years and Robinson was.

Tyson wasn't as interested in boxing and even wanted to retire after the 1988 Spinks fight. He fought Douglas when he was practically hung over and was on a diet of nothing but soup to try and get into fighting weight. He wasn't fighting the same as early as the Bruno fight.

Robinson's "off the charts speed and power" ... yeah I'm sure of it. He had speed but he himself didn't think he was that murderous of a puncher. He was fast and accurate with good power.

Mike was more elusive than Robinson and took less punishment.

Go ahead listing fights that you've never even seen in their entirety.

Sorry but Robinson was never top 3 in durability, power, speed, and skill at any weight class at any point in his career. Maybe in 3 out of 4 of those categories at best. Especially when he didn't consider himself to be a huge puncher.

LOL...he didn't have to consider himself. The evidence of a career says he was. And Mike was dropped in his prime. Douglas. Look it up. All the excuses don't change he was the undefeated champion of the world and a whopping 23. He wasn't in top shape...fine. He was still in his physical prime.

Lots of guys get dropped. He fought often against a high quality of foe. Doesn't mean they lack durability. His chin was well proven in some 200 fights and his ability off the floor is the definition of durability.

Tucker beat around the ring? Missed that fight. I wouldn't call Tucker a monster puncher (he didn't have that many quality KOs to confirm it), but he could crack. Mike did a nice job but he was arguably down after five when Tucker broke his hand. It was a solid all around performance on a night where his power wasn't enough.

And I granted Ruddock, but it's a limited example of durability against a limited foe. Mike only had a handful of grueling fights in his whole career. His durability wasn't tested often.

Again, nothing wrong with just saying "okay, maybe not the best example." Or dig in your heels. Whatever.

[Scott9945]

LOL...he didn't have to consider himself. The evidence of a career says he was. And Mike was dropped in his prime. Douglas. Look it up. All the excuses don't change he was the undefeated champion of the world and a whopping 23. He wasn't in top shape...fine. He was still in his physical prime.

Lots of guys get dropped. He fought often against a high quality of foe. Doesn't mean they lack durability. His chin was well proven in some 200 fights and his ability off the floor is the definition of durability.

Tucker beat around the ring? Missed that fight. I wouldn't call Tucker a monster puncher (he didn't have that many quality KOs to confirm it), but he could crack. Mike did a nice job but he was arguably down after five when Tucker broke his hand. It was a solid all around performance on a night where his power wasn't enough.

And I granted Ruddock, but it's a limited example of durability against a limited foe. Mike only had a handful of grueling fights in his whole career. His durability wasn't tested often.

Again, nothing wrong with just saying "okay, maybe not the best example." Or dig in your heels. Whatever.

I'm still puzzled at how anyone could call Tony Tucker a "monster puncher". The only fighter that he stopped who was any good was Douglas, and anybody who saw that fight knows that Buster just quit.