How is Mike Tyson not considered top 5 Heavyweight of all time?

[tonysoprano]

21 year old Tyson is a challenge for any HW from any era. Young Tyson was phenomenal, never seen a fighter quite like him.

This.

Tyson's problem was he peaked at 22 years old and then his lifestyle and the issues he had outside the ring led to his highly honed technique eroding.

Anyone who thinks Holyfield or Lewis would beat a prime Tyson is deluded. Lewis especially beat a drug-addicted shell of Tyson and that shouldn't even count as a victory IMO. It's like saying Camacho is better than Ray Leonard when we all know what would happen if that fight happened a decade earlier.

[hectari]

If Mike Tyson had heart instead of giving up in fights he would be a top 5

but the man had no heart, its like when it got tough for him and he was getting hurt he didn't behave like an aTG

an ATG will dig deep, and no matter how down you are in a fight they always believe there is hope to overcome

Tyson faced a little rough adversity he succumbed and gave up

basic Bully mentality

[New England]

Yeah, Wlad was a lil bit chinny but he's just way too big for Tyson. Some folks are underestimating the sheer size of Lewis and the Klit Bros.

so tyson was too small, but lamon brewster was not?

lamon brewster in his prime was flubbier than tyson ever got. probably about 3 inches taller. yeah, longer reach by a little, but he didn't use it! when he was at his best brewster was 225 lbs [226 against wladimir, 224 when heknocked out golota in a round,] and he was still a bit flabby!

the idea that wladimir was just too big [in this era or otherwise,] has been proven false! he could be hit and he could be stopped!

[MasterPlan]

Simple math. Is he better than 2 of his opponents he lost too (Holyfield, Lewis?) Is he better than one of the guys he defeated (Holmes?)
That is four names right there.

Tyson
Holyfield
Lewis
Holmes

Now just add ONE more elite heavyweight ...

[apollocreed]

This.

Tyson's problem was he peaked at 22 years old and then his lifestyle and the issues he had outside the ring led to his highly honed technique eroding.

Anyone who thinks Holyfield or Lewis would beat a prime Tyson is deluded. Lewis especially beat a drug-addicted shell of Tyson and that shouldn't even count as a victory IMO. It's like saying Camacho is better than Ray Leonard when we all know what would happen if that fight happened a decade earlier.

Prime Lewis (late 90’s) or prime Holyfield (89 to 93 or even 96 - 97) would beat prime Tyson.
What were Tyson’s big wins in his prime anyway?
His biggest wins over Holmes and Spinks aren’t even that impressive when you look at them more closely - Holmes was very rusty after a long time out of the ring and way past his best, and Spinks was a blown up light heavy who was terrified. I think you could seriously argue that Tyson’s wins over a prime Ruddock were more impressive than those two.

[apollocreed]

Simple math. Is he better than 2 of his opponents he lost too (Holyfield, Lewis?) Is he better than one of the guys he defeated (Holmes?)
That is four names right there.

Tyson
Holyfield
Lewis
Holmes

Now just add ONE more elite heavyweight ...

I don’t really get the point you’re making with the simple math, but in answer to both of your questions, no he was not better than Holyfield, Lewis or Holmes.
Tyson fans who say Lewis can’t take credit for the Tyson victory, OK, but then Tyson can’t take credit for his victory over an out of shape, old Holmes either.

[BIG GUNZ]

Tyson is my favorite fighter ever but I have to admit he’s not a top 5 heavyweight. He’s probably in the bottom of the top 10. He doesn’t really have a career defining win against an elite opponent. When he beat Larry Holmes, Holmes was almost 40 years old.

[apollocreed]

This.

Tyson's problem was he peaked at 22 years old and then his lifestyle and the issues he had outside the ring led to his highly honed technique eroding.

Anyone who thinks Holyfield or Lewis would beat a prime Tyson is deluded. Lewis especially beat a drug-addicted shell of Tyson and that shouldn't even count as a victory IMO. It's like saying Camacho is better than Ray Leonard when we all know what would happen if that fight happened a decade earlier.

Everyone knows Tyson was just fighting for money when Lewis beat him, but the fact that fight didn’t happen until ‘02 was down to Tyson avoiding fighting Lewis.
Lewis was paid step aside money by King in ‘96, and then Tyson gave up the WBC title because Lewis was mandatory.
Lewis wanted the fight from the early 90’s, but first prison, then Tyson’s ducking in favour of fighting bums prevented it.

[apollocreed]

He beat two greats in Holmes and Spinks and lost to two greats in Lewis and Holyfield.

Tyson lost to Lewis because Lewis was so much more bigger than him. Tyson's a Heavyweight (220) and a short one at that. Lennox Lewis, on the other hand, is a Super Heavyweight (250). I keep telling folks that's a whole new weight class that Mike had to go up against.

During his comeback/post-prison, Mike regained the titles and ran out of opponents so boxing's PTB bring in a former Cruiserweight, Holyfield, to challenge him; shoot his ass up with roids Bain style (look up the Evan Fields controversy) and loses to a juice head. Even than, a roided Holyfield still couldn't KO Mike completely.

The Douglas loss was when Mike was at his lowest - he fired most his team, didn't train for that fight, he was partying and high on drugs and hooked up with the infamous and shady Don King who was know for bribing and fixing fights.

Sorry but you Tyson fans have an endless list of excuses which you always reel off - D Amato dying, King, Givens, long count v Douglas, women, money, prison, drugs, Holyfield headbutts, now steroids .....
It goes on forever. You can’t accept anything isn’t down to bad luck, like his life story is some mythic Greek tragedy. In reality he was good, just not as good as you love to believe.
Douglas fought brilliantly that night and kicked his ass.
I think Douglas that night would have given major problems to any version of Tyson.
Also, those two big wins of his - Holmes was way past his best and very rusty, and Spinks was really a blown up light heavy who was terrified before the fight started.
Tyson relied heavily on intimidation, but against Holyfield he couldn’t do that, Evander was smiling and singing during his ring walk.

[MasterPlan]

I don’t really get the point you’re making with the simple math, but in answer to both of your questions, no he was not better than Holyfield, Lewis or Holmes.
Tyson fans who say Lewis can’t take credit for the Tyson victory, OK, but then Tyson can’t take credit for his victory over an out of shape, old Holmes either.

That was my point.