Comments Thread For: The Mythology Of Mike Tyson Never Ceases To Amaze

[NachoMan]

Well u calling him 5’10” is another prime example of people trying to give him extra credit. He was always listed at 5’11.5 and Larry Merchant said he saw Tyson measured with his own eyes and was 5’11.5”. Yet I’ve heard so many people say he’s 5’10”, 5’9” and they have absolutely no proof. I’ve been laser measured at just a c hair over 5’10” and I weigh 214lbs lean enough. True, I’m taller than most everyone who claims to be 5’10” and they say I must be taller, but I tell the truth. I know that doesn’t help my argument, but I’m sure Mike is taller than me, just from visuals and weight. At 220lbs lean I look more compact and like bodybuilder than he does, and I have legs. So to me I see that difference in height. Course I have no proof. But then again why does everyone shave inches off Mikes listed height? Who else does this happen with? Why would u give him credit for being 5’10” when he was never listed at that? I mean kids today probably think his first name is “prime”.

IDK how tall he really is (I doubt taller than 5'10.5"), but, truthfully, he looked about 5'7" standing next to Evander and Lennox during the pre-fight intro of the Fury-Wilder rematch. I think he's lost a bit of height over the years.

[Jab jab boom]

I disagree. The HW division is hotter now than its been in a very long time. I think, as Erdman notes, that the excitement is just nostalgia for a wildly popular cultural icon.

Well, by comparison to the Klitchko era, yes its more exciting now because there are 3 main guys that fans are interested in seeing face each other. However, wilder losing the way he did brought things down significantly and Joshua getting beaten the way he did and his rematch win being as uneventful as it was has also killed some buzz. Those situations weren't like holyfield losing an exciting fight of the yr to bowe or Lewis getting ko'd but storming back to score an emphatic ko win in a rematch. Those guys were able to either maintain or restore their images despite losing, not the same for wilder or Joshua as of now.

[BangEM]

Well, by comparison to the Klitchko era, yes its more exciting now because there are 3 main guys that fans are interested in seeing face each other. However, wilder losing the way he did brought things down significantly and Joshua getting beaten the way he did and his rematch win being as uneventful as it was has also killed some buzz. Those situations weren't like holyfield losing an exciting fight of the yr to bowe or Lewis getting ko'd but storming back to score an emphatic ko win in a rematch. Those guys were able to either maintain or restore their images despite losing, not the same for wilder or Joshua as of now.

You silly yanks will never cease to amaze me. Act like Mike Tyson didn't get knocked out by a 50-1 underdog. Act like Lennox Lewis didn't get knocked out by McCall and avoided the rematch. Act like Holyfield didn't lose to Moorer, the same Moorer that got knocked out by 45 y/o Foreman. Act like Foreman and Holmes didn't become champions in the 90s in their 40s. Act like Bowe's career didn't get ended by an Eurobum from Poland.

Funnily enough, the 80s was the weakest era in the last 5 decades (weaker than the Klitschko era) and that was the only era Mike Tyson was dominant. As soon as it got stiffer in the 90s, he was getting knocked out every time he stepped up.

[Jab jab boom]

You silly yanks will never cease to amaze me. Act like Mike Tyson didn't get knocked out by a 50-1 underdog. Act like Lennox Lewis didn't get knocked out by McCall and avoided the rematch. Act like Holyfield didn't lose to Moorer, the same Moorer that got knocked out by 45 y/o Foreman. Act like Foreman and Holmes didn't become champions in the 90s in their 40s. Act like Bowe's career didn't get ended by an Eurobum from Poland.

Funnily enough, the 80s was the weakest era in the last 5 decades (weaker than the Klitschko era) and that was the only era Mike Tyson was dominant. As soon as it got stiffer in the 90s, he was getting knocked out every time he stepped up.

you delusional and man crushed Brits never cease to amaze me. The point is about the perception of the fighter and buzz around them. Tyson was an electric fighter who captivated people. So despite his loss (which most chalked up to not taking fights seriously after a certain point) , that tyson aura still remained for a long time . When holyfield lost to Moore, it was perceived that he was washed up and had heart issues. So the view of him as a warrior never changed. When Lewis got ko'd, his stickndid drop and it took time for him to earn it back, but he did so by winning his next several fights by KO and then making McCall essentially quit in the ring. When he lost to rahman, he came right back and flattened him in even more brutal fashion. When bowe reached the stage of facing golata and struggling, the perception of him certainly changed and he was no longer viewed as the elite hw he once was. But, None of those guys were knocked around and made to quit by a fat butterball while in their absolute prime and while being in one of the biggest showcase fights of their career. There is an entirely different view of a fighter once they quit. And when they come back and fight like a scared timid b***h in the rematch, that doesn't enhance anyone's view of them. Maybe to his ball gobbling uk fans, they can look past all of that and pretend like it never happened, but to the average boxing fan who doesn't have a vested love in that fighter, the shine has been dimmed significantly. But don't worry, as long as you love him, it shouldn't matter to you if others don't.

[NachoMan]

Well, by comparison to the Klitchko era, yes its more exciting now because there are 3 main guys that fans are interested in seeing face each other. However, wilder losing the way he did brought things down significantly and Joshua getting beaten the way he did and his rematch win being as uneventful as it was has also killed some buzz. Those situations weren't like holyfield losing an exciting fight of the yr to bowe or Lewis getting ko'd but storming back to score an emphatic ko win in a rematch. Those guys were able to either maintain or restore their images despite losing, not the same for wilder or Joshua as of now.

I would argue that the way Wilder and AJ lost contributed greatly to the current HW buzz. It would be a lot less exciting if those guys had won in a pedestrian manner. Both of those fights were major events and generated tons of buzz. That, and they were both very fun to watch, which is something we learned not to expect from the HW division.

[NachoMan]

You silly yanks will never cease to amaze me. Act like Mike Tyson didn't get knocked out by a 50-1 underdog. Act like Lennox Lewis didn't get knocked out by McCall and avoided the rematch. Act like Holyfield didn't lose to Moorer, the same Moorer that got knocked out by 45 y/o Foreman. Act like Foreman and Holmes didn't become champions in the 90s in their 40s. Act like Bowe's career didn't get ended by an Eurobum from Poland.

Funnily enough, the 80s was the weakest era in the last 5 decades (weaker than the Klitschko era) and that was the only era Mike Tyson was dominant. As soon as it got stiffer in the 90s, he was getting knocked out every time he stepped up.

Curious to know how you've assessed that the 80's was the weakest HW era in the last 5 decades. What are the criteria here? It cannot be because Mike Tyson did better in the 80's than the 90's (after he went to jail and got older). There must be more.

[BangEM]

you delusional and man crushed Brits never cease to amaze me. The point is about the perception of the fighter and buzz around them. Tyson was an electric fighter who captivated people. So despite his loss (which most chalked up to not taking fights seriously after a certain point) , that tyson aura still remained for a long time . When holyfield lost to Moore, it was perceived that he was washed up and had heart issues. So the view of him as a warrior never changed. When Lewis got ko'd, his stickndid drop and it took time for him to earn it back, but he did so by winning his next several fights by KO and then making McCall essentially quit in the ring. When he lost to rahman, he came right back and flattened him in even more brutal fashion. When bowe reached the stage of facing golata and struggling, the perception of him certainly changed and he was no longer viewed as the elite hw he once was. But, None of those guys were knocked around and made to quit by a fat butterball while in their absolute prime and while being in one of the biggest showcase fights of their career. There is an entirely different view of a fighter once they quit. And when they come back and fight like a scared timid b***h in the rematch, that doesn't enhance anyone's view of them. Maybe to his ball gobbling uk fans, they can look past all of that and pretend like it never happened, but to the average boxing fan who doesn't have a vested love in that fighter, the shine has been dimmed significantly. But don't worry, as long as you love him, it shouldn't matter to you if others don't.

Stop the revisionism, you delusional yank.

Tyson got all the hype because he was the youngest HW champion ever and he gained prominence after the end of a great HW era and people were looking for a spark. His style also added to it. In all, you can say Tyson is a product of a huge marketing machine at a perfect time when boxing was looking for a saviour.

The same washed up Holyfield destroyed Mike Tyson twice after losing to Moorer. The joke is on you. Funny how the same Moorer was knocked out by 45 y/o Foreman. LMAOOO.

McCall actually would've beaten Lennox Lewis in the rematch if he hadn't been brought to fight from a mental home. Lennox didn't make him quit, his mental demons did. Why didn't Lennox take the immediate rematch like Josh did against Ruiz? Lennox was actually much more timid and cautious against McCall who was brought to fight from a mental home and it wasn't an immediate rematch. What's your excuse for that? LMAOO.

And why did you skip the fact that Holmes and Foreman were in their 40s when they became champions in the 90s? LMAAOOO

[BangEM]

Curious to know how you've assessed that the 80's was the weakest HW era in the last 5 decades. What are the criteria here? It cannot be because Mike Tyson did better in the 80's than the 90's (after he went to jail and got older). There must be more.

What do you classify as being older? The average HW reaches his prime in his late 20s to early-mid 30s. Tyson was 23 when he lost to Douglas and was 29 y/o when he came out of prison. He was actually better when he came out of prison because he destroyed Bruno who had become a better boxer faster when he came out of prison than he did in the 90s.

You judge an era by the quality of boxers. Guys like Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick, Frank Bruno, Carl Williams, Tony Tucker and Tyrell briggs aren't hall of famers...are they?

[NachoMan]

What do you classify as being older? The average HW reaches his prime in his late 20s to early-mid 30s. Tyson was 23 when he lost to Douglas and was 29 y/o when he came out of prison. He was actually better when he came out of prison because he destroyed Bruno who had become a better boxer faster when he came out of prison than he did in the 90s.

You judge an era by the quality of boxers. Guys like Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick, Frank Bruno, Carl Williams, Tony Tucker and Tyrell briggs aren't hall of famers...are they?

Not following your logic. As far as the HOF goes, were there less men voted in from the 80's than the 90's or from the other decades you mention? The "quality of boxers" is a pretty subjective standard. The fighters you mention above, apart from Tyrell "Briggs" (sic), were actually pretty damn good fighters. Not sure if you ever watched them fight. Most of them held world titles at one point.

[ShoulderRoll]

Tyson is coming back for an EXHIBITION. What is it that people don't get about that?

Let the man live his life.