Mike Tyson the greatest champion since Muhammed Ali?

[Grimmer]

People seems to forget than he was undisputed heavyweight champion of the world aged just 21.

I find that extraordinary. Here was this kid knocking out full fledged heavyweight champions, in such a brutal style....and he was 21. I'm 21, I could never imagine myself standing up to Wlad or Vitali and even lasting 15 seconds.

Amazing, Mike Tyson was simply unique. You can criticise his boxing ability....but for me, he has a place in boxing history as high as Ali, Robinson, Louis simply because of what he achieved, in such style and at such a young age. He was simply untouchable in his early years.

[Kiid Dynamite]

people seems to forget than he was undisputed heavyweight champion of the world aged just 21.

I find that extraordinary. Here was this kid knocking out full fledged heavyweight champions, in such a brutal style....and he was 21. I'm 21, i could never imagine myself standing up to wlad or vitali and even lasting 15 seconds.

Amazing, mike tyson was simply unique. You can criticise his boxing ability....but for me, he has a place in boxing history as high as ali, robinson, louis simply because of what he achieved, in such style and at such a young age. He was simply untouchable in his early years.

well said ......

[Benncollinsaad]

Your saying it like Lewis did some spectacular KO, where he put a masterful combination, body and head.

Lewis got laid out by Rahman and McCall in his prime, avenging loss's dont mean **** when you get your ass laid out by Bums.

Lewis beat a old Tyson and a old Holyfield.

The man legacy isnt as strong as people think..

YEAH, YEAH!!Finally somebody else sees the truth! And that second fight with McCall cannot be called revenge in the true sense of the word! Wake the fak up you Lewis-nuthuggers!

[The_Demon]

YEAH, YEAH!!Finally somebody else sees the truth! And that second fight with McCall cannot be called revenge in the true sense of the word! Wake the fak up you Lewis-nuthuggers!

he avenged both his losses which is more than wlad can do
lewis>klitschkos.simple

[Princemanspopa]

I mentioned not using Tyson as a barometer between Lewis and Holmes. To the best of me memory, Ali never fought Lewis. Therefore, Ali could not be uses as a barometer like Tyson could. Please follow along and quit drawing your own arguments out of air. It's quite easy to follow along..

Holmes beat Ernie Shavers on 3/25/78 to win the Heavyweight title. He defended the title 21 times going 21-0 (15 KO's) These 21 wins included wins over Shavers, Norton, Ali, Witherspoon, L Spinks, Snipes, etc.... The reign of the 21 fights lasted until 9/21/85 when he was robbed against Michael Spinks. This is a title reign of 7 1/2 years.

Please explain to me how Lewis can touch that?

How can Lennox Lewis touch the accomplishment of beating a shot,doped up Muhammad Ali?

You do realize that Williams lost by 7 points on 2 different scorecards don't you?

You do realise that as history has shown,the judges scorcards don't always relect what actually took place in the ring?

It's pretty clear you've never seen that fight to make the following comment that you just made here.Nobody who has watched that fight would ever have the nerve to claim that Larry Holmes won by such a margin.

The Witherspoon fight though was a very close fight. I believe Holmes won by 2 or 3 rounds but it was close. Every champion has those type of fights.

funnily enough, boxrec has the fight scored as close,your scoring tends to reflect that of judge Chuck Minker,I wonder why

[Axl Rose]

remember one thing in favour of Tyson. In hes 9 title defences there was never any doubt. he was never in a war with any of hes opponents, he won big every time.

Lewis, Holyfield and Holmes all had their defenses where they were stryggling big time, and may should have lost. Tyson diddnt.