Who ranks higher ATG, Tyson or Calzaghe?

[Pirao]

Well, what do you think?

[Proof2K9]

easily Tyson.

[daggum]

calzaghe never lost so he auto wins.

[John Hue]

Tyson without doubt.

[Pirao]

The people who say Tyson, why? They both beat an ATG who was past his best but still good (Hopkins and Holmes, although I think Hopkins was better when Calzaghe fought him than Holmes was when Tyson fought him), except Calzaghe also beat everyone else he fought, unified his division, moved up and won a belt in another division and retired undefeated.

Please, whether you say Tyson or Calzaghe, state your reasons.

[MCVAGINA]

Is this a joke?

Tyson obviously

[Pirao]

Is this a joke?

Tyson obviously

The jokes are all you people talking like you have the absolute reason and not posting anything of value. If you think Tyson was better cool, but at least post your reasons!

[Akyra]

calzaghe and it's not really that close when you think about it. tyson had an impressive early career then it came to the point where he was exposed for what he truly was. calzaghe on the other hand, destroyed legends while still keeping an undefeated record. calzaghe has look dominant through his entire career whereas tyson only did early in his. no one has figured out calzaghes awkward yet so effective style. the numbers and stats speak for themselves.

it's sad that calzaghe doesn't get the proper recognition. truly one of our modern era legends and all time greats.

[wazaa.]

Mike Tyson easily. youngest world champion. he unified the titles in the beginning of his career at a very young age. everybody knows the Bhop and RJJ "W's" of Calzaghe don't count. if you take these two away you can clearly see Mike has a way better resume.

[daggum]

The people who say Tyson, why? They both beat an ATG who was past his best but still good (Hopkins and Holmes, although I think Hopkins was better when Calzaghe fought him than Holmes was when Tyson fought him), except Calzaghe also beat everyone else he fought, unified his division, moved up and won a belt in another division and retired undefeated.

Please, whether you say Tyson or Calzaghe, state your reasons.

i don't remember tyson taking a highly controversial split decision over holmes. or spinks. even though he lost to lewis and holyfield i don't remember him waiting till they were in their 40's and on the slide to fight them. he also had 11 fights in a row against top ten fighters or former champs. much better than only fighting 8 top ten fighters over a 10 year period like calzaghe did as he stalled fighting bums. also when tyson knocked someone out he usually knocked them out. he didn't have those disgraceful early stoppages that helped calzaghe "win" so many of his fights. tyson had to earn his victories. perhaps that's why tyson is better.