Originally posted by Bastian Loc
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Whats Mike Tyson's best win?
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by zero188 View PostIs Tyson the Bad*ss the myth makes him out to be? No, not by a longshot. Like i said, the win against spinks was Tyson's "personal best," and the peak of his abilities. Not a great win. People will say what they want, but look at what "blown up RJJ who weighed 193" did to John Ruiz. Nobody is making haye fight at HW and he is there for a reason. Those people have no argument.
John Ruiz had cement feet and threw zero punches. It was kinda like Pac/Clottey.
Yeah Clottey was bigger, but stylistically, it didn't matter.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Bastian Loc View PostWas Berbick really any good? Same for Smith? And Micheal Spinks was a light heavyweight.
Its cool that he kttfo, but we gotta be objective about this.
Meaning, I think a prime Samuel Peter probably sparks all three of those guys out too.
So now we're back at square one.
Samuel Peter is a fat non motivated big puncher. He loses steam after 4 rounds. I've been saying this since day one and people here laughed at me. What happened when he stepped up vs when Tyson stepped up? Tyson would of beat whoever they put in front of him in those years. That's the diference between a champion and a contender my friend.
But anyway I don't have a specific win I like. I like em all. I even like the way he lost(with the exception of the second holifeild fight). Other then that he always lost like a man should and didn't ***** out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bastian Loc View PostWas Berbick really any good? Same for Smith? And Micheal Spinks was a light heavyweight.
Its cool that he kttfo, but we gotta be objective about this.
Meaning, I think a prime Samuel Peter probably sparks all three of those guys out too.
So now we're back at square one.
ANd that's the problem I encounter every time I talk about the Klitschko's and when Tyson is used as a counter example.
People are historically biased and will say the bums of era's past >>> Present Day Bums. Mike Tyson's absolute prime consisted of peddling his record and KO ratio against Journeymen. Yet all you hear is, that version of TYson would ko a Klitschko.
There is nothing on Tyson's resume that shows that he could hang with a 6'7 guy with skills, besides pointing out that Klitschko got KTFO by Sanders and Brewster. Which is a Negative Statement, and not a positive to prove your point.
To which I will immediately respond with Buster, Holyfield and Lewis. And watch the Tyson Apologists scramble with excuses. Yet Wlad was just the same ol' Wlad when he got KO'd. Couldn't be that he got a bit better now, no it's gotta be that the competition just sucks. No excuses for Klitschko's losing a couple of fights. 100's of excuses for every loss Tyson has had.
Cultural Bias at it's best.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bastian Loc View PostThat was a cherrypick on Jones part though.
John Ruiz had cement feet and threw zero punches. It was kinda like Pac/Clottey.
Yeah Clottey was bigger, but stylistically, it didn't matter.
I don't think Ruiz could have been top 5 in the 80's.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bastian Loc View PostThat was a cherrypick on Jones part though.
John Ruiz had cement feet and threw zero punches. It was kinda like Pac/Clottey.
Yeah Clottey was bigger, but stylistically, it didn't matter.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View PostHe fought Holyfield because he was thought to be old and a soft touch. He blatantly ducked Lewis for that fight. And he only fought Lennox when he had absolutely nowhere else to run.
Originally posted by jrosales13 View PostBut, a really a case can be made that Ruiz is arguably a top 3 HW in the last decade. Easily top 5 in this past era.
I don't think Ruiz could have been top 5 in the 80's.
A real case could be made for Clottey being a top 5 WW in this last decade too, but his style played right into pac's hands.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dirk Diggler UK View PostHe fought Holyfield because he was thought to be old and a soft touch. He blatantly ducked Lewis for that fight. And he only fought Lennox when he had absolutely nowhere else to run.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cupocity303 View Post
ANd that's the problem I encounter every time I talk about the Klitschko's and when Tyson is used as a counter example.
People are historically biased and will say the bums of era's past >>> Present Day Bums. Mike Tyson's absolute prime consisted of peddling his record and KO ratio against Journeymen. Yet all you hear is, that version of TYson would ko a Klitschko.
There is nothing on Tyson's resume that shows that he could hang with a 6'7 guy with skills, besides pointing out that Klitschko got KTFO by Sanders and Brewster. Which is a Negative Statement, and not a positive to prove your point.
To which I will immediately respond with Buster, Holyfield and Lewis. And watch the Tyson Apologists scramble with excuses. Yet Wlad was just the same ol' Wlad when he got KO'd. Couldn't be that he got a bit better now, no it's gotta be that the competition just sucks. No excuses for Klitschko's losing a couple of fights. 100's of excuses for every loss Tyson has had.
Cultural Bias at it's best.
And these are on ESPN CLASSIC ffs.
I wonder if they'd ever show Klitschko vs. Brock on espn classic.
Comment
Comment