I seriously think that Tyson is overrated, but he's got a better resume then Joe Calzaghe. Mike is the biggest question in boxing, but he remains a question. He never accumulated what he may have had potential to do.
Beating 3 gold medal Olympians,
Being champion at 20
UNIFYING all the belts in a tournament style at the age of just 21
Becoming world champion after just being pro a little over a year and a half.
Beating world champions, contenders, undefeated fighters, former world champions.
Fighting with a size disadvantage and weight usually.
Having over 30 fights in a year and a half.
Beating future greats and hall of famers.
Beating most fighters within' 6 rounds or less.
Being a 2 time world champion, unifying the belts both of those times.
I'm done...
But this still translates too
Best wins:
Tucker
Briggs
Holmes
Spinks
Ruddock*2
Notable Losses:
Holyfield*2
Douglas
Lewis
Should of got DQed in the Botha fight
But this still translates too
Best wins:
Tucker
Briggs
Holmes
Spinks
Ruddock*2
Notable Losses:
Holyfield*2
Douglas
Lewis
Should of got DQed in the Botha fight
Undefeated Spinks
Only man to KO Holmes
Undefeated Tucker to completely unify the division
Berbick to become the youngest heavyweight champion of all time
A slew of top contenders in the mid and late 80s
Don't see how that translates.Haha. And it's Biggs not Briggs, wrong fighter
Bad spelling, lol
At the end of the day its a case of who are your best wins and most noticable losses.I would say that Tyson has the better wins, but how would you factor in his losses?
Comment