Who's Number 1: "Greatest Records"

[butterfly1964]

Yes, of course.

But, since I was forced to post in this thread yet again...

Updated Score: 0.75 out of 10

Alright, I'll keep quiet.

[Kid Achilles]

I still don't see how Tyson is distinguished as the "youngest heavyweight champion of the world" when it is such a misleading title. Youngest man to be A heavyweight champion of the world, yeah, but not THE. Every article on the internet and in many magazines awards him this accomplishment without doing the research. Am I the only one pissed off by this?

[Yogi]

I still don't see how Tyson is distinguished as the "youngest heavyweight champion of the world" when it is such a misleading title. Youngest man to be A heavyweight champion of the world, yeah, but not THE. Every article on the internet and in many magazines awards him this accomplishment without doing the research. Am I the only one pissed off by this?

Exactly, Kid, and along with yourself, I've always been slightly perturbed by that disticntion given to Tyson.

Hey, it wasn't Luther McCarty's (was 20 years, 9 months when he won a version of a world heavyweight title...the "white" version of Jack Johnson's days) record that Tyson supposedly broke, is it?

[butterfly1964]

I still don't see how Tyson is distinguished as the "youngest heavyweight champion of the world" when it is such a misleading title. Youngest man to be A heavyweight champion of the world, yeah, but not THE. Every article on the internet and in many magazines awards him this accomplishment without doing the research. Am I the only one pissed off by this?

So by your logic, Larry Holmes was never the heavyweight champion, because he never unified.

Also a big misconception is that Tyson unified with SPinks. That's a lie! Spinks didn't have a belt when Tyson fought him. Tyson had all three belts by that time. The y even introduced him as the "UNDISPUTED" Heavyweight champion when he fought Spinks. He unified with Tony Tucker in August of '87, and was still a good 7 or 8 months younger than Floyd patterson was against Moore.

[joeytrimble]

rocky marciano was THE champ ...vacated it ..floyd and archie fought for THE championship floyd won .. lost to ignamar ..then won ..then lost to sonny who lost it to ali who got it revoked then frazier won it who lost it to foreman who lots it to ali who lost it to spinks who then lost it to ali who then in turn lost it to holmes the night holmes beat the livin piss outta him

larry holmes WAS the man in the 80s untill spinks beat him then spinks didnt do much of nothing untill the tyson fight ...

any questions?

[Kid Achilles]

I don't care if Spinks was stripped of his title for fighting Cooney, he never lost it in the ring and was still a "title holder" or at least equivalent to one in my eyes and the eyes of many writers at the time. Tyson was not the undisputed champion until he knocked out Spinks.

I am thinking of things in a historical perspective, and if you let this multiple belt business murk things up you just cheapen what it means to be a heavyweight champion.

Who is the heavyweight champion today? No one, the title's vacant. Lennox Lewis was the last heavyweight champion of the world. The so called champions today are just contenders.

Who was champion when Tyson fought Spinks? No one, that's why the fight was made, to see who the unified champion would be.

Now, I am thankful that you didn't bring up Evander Holyfield being a "5 time heavyweight champion" as a record, as that one has been known to make me throw up.

[Southpaw Stinger]

So by your logic, Larry Holmes was never the heavyweight champion, because he never unified.

Also a big misconception is that Tyson unified with SPinks. That's a lie! Spinks didn't have a belt when Tyson fought him. Tyson had all three belts by that time. The y even introduced him as the "UNDISPUTED" Heavyweight champion when he fought Spinks. He unified with Tony Tucker in August of '87, and was still a good 7 or 8 months younger than Floyd patterson was against Moore.

Holmes beat Ali who was still considered the lineal champ.

[butterfly1964]

Holmes beat Ali who was still considered the lineal champ.

Why? Ali retired, then came back. So by your logic Floyd Patterosn was never the champion because Marciano never lost. Hey, Marciano is still the champion today since he never lost in the ring yet. Or did he "vacate" the title when he died in 1969 to frazier? Anyway, my point is Spinks didn't have a belt, and I don't care if a boxing magazine still recognized him as the champion, it doesn't mean anything if he doesn't have any hardware to show for it. Trying to discredit Tyson as being the youngest hw champion is like trying to discredit Tiger Woods for achieving the Grand Slam, just because he didn't do it in one calendar year. It's all subjective, but when it comes down to it, Tyson was the youngest heavyweight champion in history, period!

[butterfly1964]

I don't care if Spinks was stripped of his title for fighting Cooney, he never lost it in the ring and was still a "title holder" or at least equivalent to one in my eyes and the eyes of many writers at the time. Tyson was not the undisputed champion until he knocked out Spinks.

I am thinking of things in a historical perspective, and if you let this multiple belt business murk things up you just cheapen what it means to be a heavyweight champion.

Who is the heavyweight champion today? No one, the title's vacant. Lennox Lewis was the last heavyweight champion of the world. The so called champions today are just contenders.

Who was champion when Tyson fought Spinks? No one, that's why the fight was made, to see who the unified champion would be.

Now, I am thankful that you didn't bring up Evander Holyfield being a "5 time heavyweight champion" as a record, as that one has been known to make me throw up.

Again, Spinks had no hardware for being "champion" just recognition by a ****** little magazine. Tyson possessed all three belts that existed at the time before he fought Spinks therefore he was the undisputed champion. Again, beating Tony Tucker unified the belts, and he was still 21 years and 2 months old when doing that, still making him younger than the 21 years and 10 month old Floyd Patterson.

Actually, since Spinks won the belt from Holmes, and Holmes wasn't undisputed either, that means that Spinks wasn't undisputed when he beat Holmes in the first place. So Even if Tyson had two of the belts, that would make him more of a champion than Spinks, cause then he would have had more of the champion than Spinks ever had.

[butterfly1964]

bump.......