Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

Question Big H were do you place tyson in your list of great heavies.

---

5th ;)

Think thats a bit high but not impossible to think of mike being that high

definately between 5th and 10th

Think he is between 6-10 and didn't you rank him like 8 or something like that and yea i think he does deserve to be in the top ten was a bit harsh on him at the beginning

yes i ranked him 8th perhaps he deserves 7th i will work it out later my own top ten

Make a post and i list my top heavies with you mr tyson

What's not to like? He had the most perfect blend of skills of any HW of any era. You're talking speed, head movement power, ferocity and the balls to bring it all to the table.

I'm not one to say one guy from one era would beat another guy from another era but I can't see any ther HW on their best day beating Tyson on his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bx730NY

What's not to like? He had the most perfect blend of skills of any HW of any era. You're talking speed, head movement power, ferocity and the balls to bring it all to the table.

I'm not one to say one guy from one era would beat another guy from another era but I can't see any ther HW on their best day beating Tyson on his.

---

And what was his best days to you im just curious.

I think that Ali could beat Tyson on any of his days if Ali was a prime Ali.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dasamm

Prime Tyson was the ultimate crowd pleaser. He didn't go into a fight just to win, he went in there to KO his opponents in the worst way possible. He threw fluid, fast and brutal combinations! Always came forward, had a great chin. He gave off that aura of invincibility. He was already going downhill before he fought Douglas..too young..too much sh*t going on in his life that he didn't know how to react too.

It's hard because Tyson peaked and then went down hill so quickly. I don't think prime Tyson couldve beat a prime Ali. I do think he wouldve given Frazier a hard time.

I admit I always used to always over rate Tyson and it wasn't until recently I realized that a lot of guys wouldve given him problems. He wiped the floor with Holmes and even though Holmes was getting old he still beat Mercer and went 12 with Holyfield 4 years after he got destroyed by Tyson so he wasn't THAT past it.

---

Yeah Larry really was,he needed footwork and a speedy jab to do his work
Those are the first to go
He might have been able to outhink some guys still,but that wasnt even close to being Larry Holmes
And even then,in those fights he was back in the swing of things,not out of boxing for two full years

Thank you monkey that is what i said at the beginning of the post and no one agreed with me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

Thank you monkey that is what i said at the beginning of the post and no one agreed with me

---

I was vehmently opposed to the senior circuit bout of Homes/Foreman on the same grounds
Holmes works best on the sides using footwork and that jab,Big George just parks himself in the center,and waits for you.Speed is the first thing to go,power the last.I have the utmost respect for the Easton Assasin,and I think he would probably have been hurt in that fight

Im going to bump this because that guy still didn't answer my question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Punisher136

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miles

Tyson revisionism is something that has taken hold in last last few years since the Lewis loss and the McBride and Williams debacles....More and more so these revisionists are creeping out.

Look back to the '80's and the excitement and thrill of Tyson unifying the belts and with a style that excited ALL. He got people interested in boxing in a way that hadnt been so since the '70's. He did it with flair and power to dazzle and at such a young age.

Tyson was young and had demons and in due course let those skills waste away. He then got incarcerated for 3 years and came back in a rush and underprepared. The slide was apparent even a decade ago. The Tyson that lost to Holyfield was not the same Tyson that had reawakened the sport.

The Tyson of those few years (1986-1988) had a style, confidence and swagger that ANYONE in the history of boxing would have issues with. Mike was special, but Mike allowed his flaws and weaknesses to eventually take hold.

That peak period Tyson would be a handful for anybody in the history of boxing no doubt...and that is why he deserves his respect...

---

He got the wrong people interested in boxing. Most of his fights were short and brutal. Everyone that was solely a tyson fan just wanted to see a knock out. In fact i blame tyson for a lot of things that went arye with boxing in the late 80's early 90's. People who were solely fans of tyson didn't wanna see fights that were technical clinics that the dedicated fan would enjoy, they wanted to see unskilled (not saying tyson is unskilled because thats far from the truth but im saying in relation to other fights not involving tyson) anybodies just throw punch after punch with no emphasis on defense (again tyson had a great defense but this isn't about his fights) going for knockouts. Without tyson, More people would've viewed the PBF/ De la Hoya fight in a more positive light.

---

What does Tyson have to do with Oscar/ Floyd?? Tyson brought energy and excitement and lived up to his billing. Floyd and Oscar fought an interesting but predictable technical fight. Therein is the difference. Floyd against Oscar wasnt exciting. But since the prime of Tyson we have had any number of exciting bouts. How about Barrera: Morales? Gatti: Ward? Which do you prefer? Floyd against Oscar or other classic fights which have indeed happened since prime Tyson left the planet.

There are great fights throughout the divisions...Tyson is not connected to Oscar: PBF in any way...

I dont see what you are saying...

---

I'm saying that there's people who were only interested in brutal style fights because of tyson. WE can see the skill that tyson had, but some people who were drawn to the sport by tyson only saw him for his power and knockouts. Some of the boxing fans that have defected for other more "entertaining" sports are these people. I'm not saying tyson is the only person to ever have an intense physical fighting style. I would rather see a classic battle between two fighters but I see the skill involved behind that. There are others who only see it as all out punching with no technique. De la Hoya mayweather is bashed for 1 reason more than any other. Not because they were over paid. Not because it was the technical display that every true boxing fan expected but because there wasn't enough brutallity. I have heard on more than one main stream sports show that in order for a boxing match to be classic there has to be blood and bruised eyes. Thats tyson's fault.

---

Il tell u why Mayweather-De La Hoya was bashed..and it it aint because of Tyson...its simply because of the huge hype surrounding that fight,particularly Mayweather who said he was going to take De La Hoya out...thats why some people were dissapointed...just the fight hype machine's fault man!

Man how did we go form Tyson to that post man people get off subject sometimes but o well.