The Myth Of Mike Tyson

[Verstyle]

It took Ali four years as a pro to get a title shot and Tyson just two years, so Tyson in fact got a title shot quicker.

that damn butterfly doesnt know **** then. knew i shoulda boxreced it

[butterfly1964]

It took Ali four years as a pro to get a title shot and Tyson just two years, so Tyson in fact got a title shot quicker.

Bingo.....

[Verstyle]

Bingo.....

i mean in less fights. my bad

[Brassangel]

After six months of abandonment from this website, I'm surprised to see this thread still getting posts. SABBATH started something good, that's for sure.

A lot of fighters have myths that surround them. I think that more people are starting to analyze Tyson's career (and even Ali's) a little more realistically now that the heavyweight division has lost it's glamor. Where else is there to turn except for the glory days of sports' ex-greatest prize? The Heavyweight Champion of the World.

Tyson showed us on multiple occasions that he had what it takes to win the big fights; most of these examples I have listed countless times before. Nobody denies that he was incredibly gifted, but also emotionally distraught. I think that people are starting to look at the profession instead of the person, which will have a positive effect on the general analyses of Tyson's career.

[brownpimp88]

The guy that wrote this article is a ****in dumbass. Michael Spinks's only claim to fame was beating larry holmes twice, so what he did before that means nothing, what a dumbass. You can basically diss every boxer if you do full in depth research on thier career. The only guy thats kinda hard to degrade is ali cuz he beat better comp at heavyweight than any other fighter can dream of.

Buster douglas was his only noteworthy opponent lol, how about the undefeated tony tucker, you know the guy that kicked buster's ass. Or how about razor ruddock, the guy that had loads of potential. Tyson has beat enough contenders at heavyweight to be top 10 and he is top 10, nuff said.

[Brassangel]

Well, the article may be a little strange, but I wouldn't call him dumb. The error in analyzing Mike Tyson's career comes from viewing it like everybody else's. He didn't grow into a peak, he shot out of the gates at his. The more he won, the less he cared. His greatness came only in moments, leaving the crowds knowing that he had nearly unlimited potential in the tank; unfortunately, he left it untapped for most of his fights from 1988 on. Now he's sparring never-would-be's and amateurs for money. More than a myth, people prefer the alternate reality that should/would have been, if only....[FILL IN THE BLANKS HERE].

No one is saying that this article is the 'end-all' for Mike Tyson fans, either. Just an article.

[gandhalf]

Been rewatching his recent and past fights lately..
watching Him reminds me how one dimensional boxing is though.
any versions of tyson would get easily taklen care of under different rules or circumstances but since everybody's forced to stand against Him...

It's a different story...

Having said that , I also think He was extremely talented.
but ironically ,He also happens to be imo , THE most overrated fighter in boxing history.

Look at a past prime foreman's achievements. Now compare them
To Tyson's (McBride anyone?) at even an older age , Foreman was giving one hell of a fight against a top Holyfield...and Foreman even won the belt in his 40's
Past prime Tyson gets owned by a D level fighter.

Prime tyson looks good vs monumental cans.
then gets put to the test..and gets owned by Douglas. sadly , that wasn't even a fluke.

Tyson shoulda tried K1 instead of embarrassing himself in his own sport vs Mcbride...

It woulda been funnier to see his ass getting KOed via low or highkicks...
NO 8 counts are needed when you get hit flush with the shin.
LOL...talk about "powerful puncher".. punches are jokes compared to flush highkicks. In terms of pwoer they are.

And what's even more pathetic is that Tyson was a joke in that department when compared to the likes of Foreman , Tua , Peter , Shavers.. and the list goes on...
Tyson wasn't even the most powerful thing in his own sport!

But due to the excessive media-brainwashing...He became more dangerous than a ******* or a hand grenade.

that's how overhyped that guy was..
the excess of the 80's..
Tyson is the perfect representation of that era.
The living incarnation of of the hype machine.

Getting outboxed by Botha...
ridiculed by Lennox...He sure was a king of "**** talking" though.
"I'll eat your children" , "praise to allah"!...lol
and the fans loved every bit of it.

And to think that I used to believe He was a top 3 goat material...lol

[Brassangel]

Originally posted by gandhalf
Been rewatching his recent and past fights lately..
watching Him reminds me how one dimensional boxing is though.
any versions of tyson would get easily taklen care of under different rules or circumstances but since everybody's forced to stand against Him...

It's a different story...

Having said that , I also think He was extremely talented.
but ironically ,He also happens to be imo , THE most overrated fighter in boxing history.

Look at a past prime foreman's achievements. Now compare them
To Tyson's (McBride anyone?) at even an older age , Foreman was giving one hell of a fight against a top Holyfield...and Foreman even won the belt in his 40's
Past prime Tyson gets owned by a D level fighter.

Prime tyson looks good vs monumental cans.
then gets put to the test..and gets owned by Douglas. sadly , that wasn't even a fluke.

Tyson shoulda tried K1 instead of embarrassing himself in his own sport vs Mcbride...

It woulda been funnier to see his ass getting KOed via low or highkicks...
NO 8 counts are needed when you get hit flush with the shin.
LOL...talk about "powerful puncher".. punches are jokes compared to flush highkicks. In terms of pwoer they are.

And what's even more pathetic is that Tyson was a joke in that department when compared to the likes of Foreman , Tua , Peter , Shavers.. and the list goes on...
Tyson wasn't even the most powerful thing in his own sport!

But due to the excessive media-brainwashing...He became more dangerous than a ******* or a hand grenade.

that's how overhyped that guy was..
the excess of the 80's..
Tyson is the perfect representation of that era.
The living incarnation of of the hype machine.

Getting outboxed by Botha...
ridiculed by Lennox...He sure was a king of "**** talking" though.
"I'll eat your children" , "praise to allah"!...lol
and the fans loved every bit of it.

And to think that I used to believe He was a top 3 goat material...lol

Wow...not a true, accurate, or intelligent bit in that entire post. Just opinionated, or "excess" smacktalk without reasonable publishings or citations of credible research.

At any rate, I believe that the "Myth" goes both ways.

[Ryn0]

You just have to look at Tyson speed and power in his prime to know he was a great fighter.

Anyone who denies it are usually Lewis or Ali fans that are angry coz a yob like Mike Tyson is ranked up there with their man.

Ali surely has to be the most mythical of them all, if he was as good as people say he would have beaten everyone he faced regardless of age.

Ali was like the old days PBF, over-rated and over hyped

I agree that tyson was a great fighter who didn't manage to live up to his potential but all we do know is what happened and what thappened was he lost to some good fighters and KO'd some very average ones with the exception of a few. Now to say ali was over-hyped and over-rated is wrong in my opinion. He had trouble with certain fighter such as Cooper and Frazier etc. but he beat them didn't he? every fighter has a style that suits another fight take frazier,foreman for example ali had great trouble with frazier but foreman did not. Ali had little trouble with foreman but frazier did.
To say Ali should have beaten everyone regardless of age is truly an ali hater statement. He fought leon spinks to regain his title even after doctor had stated he was too damaged to fight and his reflexes slowed dramatically from his prime. Ali V holmes was a shadow of his former self. But the medical report before the fight stated that he had a hole in the membrane of his brain but Don King hid the report from prying eyes. To say a boxer should be able to beat another regardless of age is ******. Even tyson who was an exciting fighter and i liked him very much lost, as his skills faded and age caught up with him. Tyson was indeed destructive an exciting and if tyson was in ali era then yes we might be talking about tyson as one of his greatest foes. But he wasn't, tyson failed to live up to what he could have and although it may hurt some of you to admit it. His oppostion was average with the exception of a few. We can only base a fighter on the opposition he fought. The better the opposition got the Harder tyson lost. Some of you will disagree with me so feel free to change my mind it is very open and willing to gain critisism. But anyone who post meaningless 3 line posts saying tyson was great, ali was average refrain yourself from doing it. It's pointless and proves nothing.

[butterfly1964]

I agree that tyson was a great fighter who didn't manage to live up to his potential but all we do know is what happened and what thappened was he lost to some good fighters and KO'd some very average ones with the exception of a few. Now to say ali was over-hyped and over-rated is wrong in my opinion. He had trouble with certain fighter such as Cooper and Frazier etc. but he beat them didn't he? every fighter has a style that suits another fight take frazier,foreman for example ali had great trouble with frazier but foreman did not. Ali had little trouble with foreman but frazier did.
To say Ali should have beaten everyone regardless of age is truly an ali hater statement. He fought leon spinks to regain his title even after doctor had stated he was too damaged to fight and his reflexes slowed dramatically from his prime. Ali V holmes was a shadow of his former self. But the medical report before the fight stated that he had a hole in the membrane of his brain but Don King hid the report from prying eyes. To say a boxer should be able to beat another regardless of age is ******. Even tyson who was an exciting fighter and i liked him very much lost, as his skills faded and age caught up with him. Tyson was indeed destructive an exciting and if tyson was in ali era then yes we might be talking about tyson as one of his greatest foes. But he wasn't, tyson failed to live up to what he could have and although it may hurt some of you to admit it. His oppostion was average with the exception of a few. We can only base a fighter on the opposition he fought. The better the opposition got the Harder tyson lost. Some of you will disagree with me so feel free to change my mind it is very open and willing to gain critisism. But anyone who post meaningless 3 line posts saying tyson was great, ali was average refrain yourself from doing it. It's pointless and proves nothing.

...