Printable View
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEEI30HC1zw
Mike Tyson launches his professional career with a quick beatdown of Hector Mercedes.
Love him or hate him, there never was or will be another heavyweight who can capture the public's imagination and generate the excitement and revenue that Iron Mike could.
So for that, I say CHEERS to Tyson. The excitement he brought in the ring more than made up for the chaos and misery he brought outside the ring lol
Y'know, 19 year old Mike Tyson had been a pro for only 8 months when Cus D'Amato died in Nov 1985.
The first time I ever saw Mike Tyson was on tv the month after, Dec 1985, the Big Sam Scaff fight, and Tyson looked amazing. It was his 14th fight in only 9 months as a pro. They had him fighting 2 fights each month, sometimes even 3 in a month.
They were developing Tyson, so the opponents were low-level yet, but as the level increased, the knockouts kept coming right up to the world-class level less than a year later. He was demolishing them.
http://i49.tinypic.com/1z6ur8j.jpg
Phenomenal fighter in 1986, '87, and '88.
I think his accomplishments earns him a position in the Top 10 Heavyweights of All-Time.
Youngest Champ of All-Time.
He unified the division and restored order as there were 3 Champs at the time.
Next he restored lineage by capturing the lineal Man-Who-Beat-The-Man title by KO'ing Michael Spinks in '88. Tyson also was #1 on the Pound-For-Pound list.
Dominant fighter for a few years. Everyone knew who was The Man, there was no debate.
^ That's enough to earn him a spot.
Don't know who the guy in the uppercut gif above is, and I'm not gonna be bothered to find out.
http://i48.tinypic.com/v6n4ox.jpg
^ James Quick Tillis went the distance which was a victory of sorts for Tyson opponents back then. Lose about every rd, but not getting knocked out was the victory.
Benitez was the youngest champ; Patterson the youngest holder of THE Heavyweight Championship, Tyson was merely the youngest world title holder at Heavyweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
Depends what is meant by 'unified'; for starters he did not beat the WBO and WAA champions...Quote:
He unified the division and restored order as there were 3 Champs at the time.
He won it, he did not restore it, the lineage line arguably goes back to Figg, definitely to Sullivan and Jackson.Quote:
Next he restored lineage by capturing the lineal Man-Who-Beat-The-Man title by KO'ing Michael Spinks in '88.
The most subjective title in boxing. Many had Hagler #1 up to the Leonard loss. Then come late 87 Chavez beat Rosario and many had Chavez #1...Quote:
Tyson also was #1 on the Pound-For-Pound list.
Perhaps it is best to say Tyson was a contender for the honour from the Tucker to the Douglas bout.
'No debate'? Ric Flair may argue with you, and as mentioned Messrs Chavez and Hagler too, in this sport!Quote:
Dominant fighter for a few years. Everyone knew who was The Man, there was no debate.
As for your gif, I believe that was Jose Ribalta.
Forgive me, I neglected to write youngest man to win a version of the Heavyweight Title. EVERYBODY knows Wilfred Benitez is the youngest man inclusive of all weight classes.
WBO was garbage at the time, nobody gave that Title any respect. It was WBA, WBC, and IBF.
Lineage was broken because lineal Champ Michael Spinks retired as Champ. He unretired and Tyson destroyed him making Tyson The-Man-Who-Beat-The-Man.
Ali had beat Leon Spinks, so Ali was The Man.
Ali retired as Champ, but came back when Holmes was Champ.
Holmes whupped Ali making Holmes The Man.
Michael Spinks got the decisions against Holmes making Michael Spinks The Man.
Michael Spinks retires as Champ, but came back for the huge payday when Tyson was now Champ.
Mike Tyson destroys Michael Spinks making Mike Tyson The-Man-Who-Beat-The-Man.
"To be The Man, WOOOOOO, you've gotta beat The Man!"
In 1989, prior to the 1990 Douglas fight, I distinctly remember Ring Magazine had Mike Tyson at pound-for-pound #1. And I agreed with it that Julio Cesar Chavez was #2. Ultimately Chavez had a better, more consistent career, but for those few years, Tyson had it all.
And migwetch, that is Jose Ribalta.
My Mum does not...Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
The WBO was an off shoot of the WBA, so why were they garbage and the WBA were not? Also as we found out another off shoot of the WBA, the IBF, had a President taking bribes at the time, yet they get respect? And do not get me started on Suliman and his cronies...Quote:
WBO was garbage at the time, nobody gave that Title any respect. It was WBA, WBC, and IBF.
Spinks did not retire pre Tyson, with the exception of a short period in the late 1970's. I think you are getting confused when the Jinx gave up the IBF crown to fight Cooney. Then Spinks was debating whether to have the knee surgery he required, as the Tyson fight did not look like happening, on his and Lewis' terms.Quote:
Lineage was broken because lineal Champ Michael Spinks retired as Champ.
Alas, not so:Quote:
In 1989, prior to the 1990 Douglas fight, I distinctly remember Ring Magazine had Mike Tyson at pound-for-pound #1.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-g...0821-00001.jpg
Sorry about that, it is an old scan, and I do not have the original magazine now.
But here is The Ring's first offical pound for pound rankings:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-v...0821-00004.jpg
Now, although there is no date, Carbajal was 32-2, which meant the rankings began around early 1995...
Brit kid knows his junk! Can we argue tyson was the most exciting heavyweight???? At least of my lifetime anyway.
Well Steve Farhhod the old editor of the ring saysQuote:
Originally Posted by BritkidMy Mum does not...Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
The WBO was an off shoot of the WBA, so why were they garbage and the WBA were not? Also as we found out another off shoot of the WBA, the IBF, had a President taking bribes at the time, yet they get respect? And do not get me started on Suliman and his cronies...Quote:
WBO was garbage at the time, nobody gave that Title any respect. It was WBA, WBC, and IBF.
Spinks did not retire pre Tyson, with the exception of a short period in the late 1970's. I think you are getting confused when the Jinx gave up the IBF crown to fight Cooney. Then Spinks was debating whether to have the knee surgery he required, as the Tyson fight did not look like happening, on his and Lewis' terms.Quote:
Lineage was broken because lineal Champ Michael Spinks retired as Champ.
Alas, not so:Quote:
In 1989, prior to the 1990 Douglas fight, I distinctly remember Ring Magazine had Mike Tyson at pound-for-pound #1.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-g...0821-00001.jpg
Sorry about that, it is an old scan, and I do not have the original magazine now.
But here is The Ring's first offical pound for pound rankings:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-v...0821-00004.jpg
Now, although there is no date, Carbajal was 32-2, which meant the rankings began around early 1995...
“I voted for Tyson, and he's a definite first-ballot Hall of Famer,” Showtime boxing analyst Steve Farhood told me. As editor of KO Magazine and also former editor of The RING, Farhood covered Tyson’s pro career from the earliest stages.
“Those who don't think so are practicing revisionist history,” Farhood said. “I laugh when I read how Tyson was an underachiever and should have been dominant for much longer. First of all, he was not only the top heavyweight in the world, and the first undisputed champion in years, but he was the No. 1-ranked fighter in the game, pound for pound. And to secure that position, he beat the No. 2, Michael Spinks.”
Tyson worthy of his hall of fame induction | RingTV
I wasn't around back then so wouldn't know, but it definitely is possible that he was ranked #1 over Sweet Pea because when he KTFO Spinks, Pernell was coming off a loss JLR a few short months before. It was a bullshit decision, but still technically a "loss", so Sweet Pea couldn't have been #1 at the time Tyson beat Spinks.
What about Ray Leonard though? He was coming off his big upset over Hagler and a whipping of Danny Lalonde.
The thing about Tyson, he fought like a small fighter. He certainly had flaws, like being much too willing to fall into clinches and let a bigger man lay on him. But, by and large, he fought fast. he started outside, closed quickly and did lots of damage on the way in. His hands were as fast as anybody that has ever been a HW; his feet were real fast as well.
When you consider him against the all-time heavyweights...I don't think he would beat Joe louis because Louis threw such concise powerful punches. He was very fast with his hands as well, and shorter; he'd catch Tyson coming in. Of course, the speed and power of Tyson could make all that irrelevant, but I think louis would beat him.
I think Tyson would beat Ali, and have the easiest time against the 'prime' Ali. Because the way Ali would fight, with movement and jabs, was all all all wrong against Tyson. First, you ain't gonna beat Tyson, at his best, with a jab. His whole freaking game was getting around a jab. They knew he was a short HW and programmed him accordingly. Now, if you jab, or feint the jab, and counter off his reaction, you can get some action.
But to jab and move? Foolish. That would let him get up steam, start taking those crossover steps (watch tape and see how often he would step over, to his right, end up in a southpaw stance and punch effectively from there)and landing punches from odd angles. he'd beat Ali easy. He'd have more trouble with the older, slower, clutch and grab Ali.
Want to see Ali vs Tyson? Look no further than how Patterson & Liston did vs Ali.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
My point was 'The Ring' did not rank fighters pound for pound before 1995...
In 1989, yeah Whitaker despite the Ramirez fix... I mean robbery (so sue me Senor Suleiman), was not pound for pound a contender for the #1 spot, but Chavez was. And some had the Kid from Culiacan ahead of Tyson, pound for pound.
I have a lot of time for Farhood, he was a brilliant editor of 'The Ring', and badly treated by them. But he made his name selling 'The Ring' as not Farhood's magazine, but a genuinely independent free spirit in boxing. Trying to repair the damage of the US Boxing Championship.Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWell Steve Farhhod the old editor of the ring saysQuote:
Originally Posted by BritkidMy Mum does not...Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
The WBO was an off shoot of the WBA, so why were they garbage and the WBA were not? Also as we found out another off shoot of the WBA, the IBF, had a President taking bribes at the time, yet they get respect? And do not get me started on Suliman and his cronies...Quote:
WBO was garbage at the time, nobody gave that Title any respect. It was WBA, WBC, and IBF.
Spinks did not retire pre Tyson, with the exception of a short period in the late 1970's. I think you are getting confused when the Jinx gave up the IBF crown to fight Cooney. Then Spinks was debating whether to have the knee surgery he required, as the Tyson fight did not look like happening, on his and Lewis' terms.Quote:
Lineage was broken because lineal Champ Michael Spinks retired as Champ.
Alas, not so:Quote:
In 1989, prior to the 1990 Douglas fight, I distinctly remember Ring Magazine had Mike Tyson at pound-for-pound #1.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-g...0821-00001.jpg
Sorry about that, it is an old scan, and I do not have the original magazine now.
But here is The Ring's first offical pound for pound rankings:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-v...0821-00004.jpg
Now, although there is no date, Carbajal was 32-2, which meant the rankings began around early 1995...
“I voted for Tyson, and he's a definite first-ballot Hall of Famer,” Showtime boxing analyst Steve Farhood told me. As editor of KO Magazine and also former editor of The RING, Farhood covered Tyson’s pro career from the earliest stages.
“Those who don't think so are practicing revisionist history,” Farhood said. “I laugh when I read how Tyson was an underachiever and should have been dominant for much longer. First of all, he was not only the top heavyweight in the world, and the first undisputed champion in years, but he was the No. 1-ranked fighter in the game, pound for pound. And to secure that position, he beat the No. 2, Michael Spinks.”
Tyson worthy of his hall of fame induction | RingTV
Believe it or not, I too like Farhood ranked Tyson #1 pound for pound post Hagler, until the Douglas defeat. My point was many had Chavez in that spot, and with hindsight, they were probably right.
I dont know much about Chavez career but did he ever have a period where unquestionably he was the very best in his weight with no challengers? Did he unify? Was he undisputed?Quote:
Originally Posted by BritkidI have a lot of time for Farhood, he was a brilliant editor of 'The Ring', and badly treated by them. But he made his name selling 'The Ring' as not Farhood's magazine, but a genuinely independent free spirit in boxing. Trying to repair the damage of the US Boxing Championship.Quote:
Originally Posted by rossWell Steve Farhhod the old editor of the ring saysQuote:
Originally Posted by BritkidMy Mum does not...Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
The WBO was an off shoot of the WBA, so why were they garbage and the WBA were not? Also as we found out another off shoot of the WBA, the IBF, had a President taking bribes at the time, yet they get respect? And do not get me started on Suliman and his cronies...Quote:
WBO was garbage at the time, nobody gave that Title any respect. It was WBA, WBC, and IBF.
Spinks did not retire pre Tyson, with the exception of a short period in the late 1970's. I think you are getting confused when the Jinx gave up the IBF crown to fight Cooney. Then Spinks was debating whether to have the knee surgery he required, as the Tyson fight did not look like happening, on his and Lewis' terms.Quote:
Lineage was broken because lineal Champ Michael Spinks retired as Champ.
Alas, not so:Quote:
In 1989, prior to the 1990 Douglas fight, I distinctly remember Ring Magazine had Mike Tyson at pound-for-pound #1.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-g...0821-00001.jpg
Sorry about that, it is an old scan, and I do not have the original magazine now.
But here is The Ring's first offical pound for pound rankings:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-v...0821-00004.jpg
Now, although there is no date, Carbajal was 32-2, which meant the rankings began around early 1995...
“I voted for Tyson, and he's a definite first-ballot Hall of Famer,” Showtime boxing analyst Steve Farhood told me. As editor of KO Magazine and also former editor of The RING, Farhood covered Tyson’s pro career from the earliest stages.
“Those who don't think so are practicing revisionist history,” Farhood said. “I laugh when I read how Tyson was an underachiever and should have been dominant for much longer. First of all, he was not only the top heavyweight in the world, and the first undisputed champion in years, but he was the No. 1-ranked fighter in the game, pound for pound. And to secure that position, he beat the No. 2, Michael Spinks.”
Tyson worthy of his hall of fame induction | RingTV
Believe it or not, I too like Farhood ranked Tyson #1 pound for pound post Hagler, until the Douglas defeat. My point was many had Chavez in that spot, and with hindsight, they were probably right.