Not even top 100 P4P ATG. Barely top 20 HW. He is the most overrated fighter ever.
Why do people call Mike Tyson an ATG?
Collapse
-
-
-
The problem with these kinds of debates is balance. There very rarely is any. No one makes the debate that Larry Holmes dominated his era and is n all time great. They just very rarely mention that Holmes saw one of the weakest eras ever for HW during his reign. He was obviously so much better than anyone in his time, that does not take away from what you see when he boxed. Only that no one was really in his league while he was champ. Wladimir Klitschko has the opposite problem. Everyone points to his upset losses early on and his weak competition of his era, but they ignore what they saw in his prime: He became so much better in his reign as HW champion than anyone else that he made a near decade of dominance look easy. Like Holmes, he did not have any great HW to push him in his prime, But that should not take away what you saw when he boxed: Also an all time great.
Mike Tyson needs the same lens. There was no great HW in his era. No one to challenge him. Holyfield was coming into his own when Tyson slipped up in Tokyo, then lost almost three years of his life to a **** trial and jail sentence. So his prime falls into the same rightful criticism of Holmes and Klitschko. But the man almost single handedly saved boxing in the US. He was dominate, ending fights brutally and with cruel efficiency. He was theater. Under Cus D'Amato, he was defensively solid and technically sound.
It is okay to believe what you see, and criticize. In my humble unimportant opinion, Tyson is not close to top 10. If you go all the way back into the Jack Johnson's era (which for all time greats you should), Tyson may be out of the top 20. But considering how many thousands of boxers have laced on boots in the history of HW boxing, that is by any rational thought an all time great.Comment
-
- - Musta been in diapers then.The problem with these kinds of debates is balance. There very rarely is any. No one makes the debate that Larry Holmes dominated his era and is n all time great. They just very rarely mention that Holmes saw one of the weakest eras ever for HW during his reign. He was obviously so much better than anyone in his time, that does not take away from what you see when he boxed.
Lar a single administrative belt holder in a multi belt era he helped to create. His was the giant sucking sound vacuum after Joe, Ali, and George retired with Kenny soon after. He never fought the WBA champs, and point in fact when approaching Rocky 49-0, he fights the first standing champ having won his belt in the ring, gets whooped, and unable to even pick up Rocky's jockstrap much less carry it.
His true title record starting with Michael Spinks is 0-6, 0 KO. Ya could look it up but for "boxing" covering him up with figments of imagination leaves.
What Great calls out Butterbean to be knocked down in his last moment of boxing?
Comment
-
I curious about the Lennox/Tyson common opponents bit. Other than Frank Bruno, which Lewis made a meal of, who else?He had ATG abilities and he beat common opponents with Lennox Lewis more decisively, and common opponents also rate Tyson higher than Lennox Lewis. Tyrell Biggs said Tyson was the best he fought. Tucker said Tyson was a phenomenon and Tucker fought Lewis.
His resume probably isn't ATG but sometimes you have to take more into consideration because theress simply more to consider.
Not that it matters, as most of the ones Lewis beat quicker (Ruddock, Golota) or beat full stop (Holyfield) were when Mike was post-prime.Comment
-
That's what I typed, only in reverse.
How can a fight fan claim Ali's resume is fake yet praise Mike
????
Edit -
If a fight fan prefers Mike's STYLE, that's a whole other topic. If we are being UNBIASED and judging resumes LOGICALLY.....Last edited by BodyBagz; 03-14-2022, 12:18 AM.Comment
-
Tyson left oversComment
-
Comment
-
Comment
Comment