Printable View
Yes Holmes was 38 but his only 2 defeats were points defeats prior to Tyson to Spinks Tyson knocked him cold Holmes went on to fight for many more years fighting twice for world title he was only ever stopped once in all his years as a pro and that man was Tyson.
I guess for the same reason they would like a dumb ol fighter Frank Bruno.
HA! Just kiddin' you!
Well i guess you have me there but i talking about a young holmes you keep talking about th old one. Any how back to my orignial question what was so great about mike.
Most people know my feelings on this, but just wanna pick up on the point above:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
Most champions that have dominated an era, did not face GREAT opposition and people will happily put them in their top 10 lists ;) If you have an argument about Tyson it cannot be based on his opposition or you would have to apply to virtually every dominant champion in history - coz the heavyweight division has traditionally only ever had 1 great fighter in each era (with the exception of the early seventies and ninieties)
Proof in point - check the opposition of............
Jack Dempsey
Rocky Marciano
Jack Johsnon
Joe Louis
Sonny Liston
Larry Holmes
................................................
But he didn't dominate a era he only was there for two years and then got knocked out by a ok fighter douglas and how much out of his prime could of he had been by then. Not his oppistion i question Big H it is that i think against great fighters he crumbled and i dont think he dersves a spot in the top ten maybe the top 15 or 20, But by the same token i understand what you mean.
And alot of us posters on the board were in our teens when he came to power...you always think your generation of whatever is better than those after and the best compared to the past.....He was just a monster! Everbody wanted to see a Tyson fight!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel
He dominated 1986 - 1990 - that's an eraQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
+ There is no time definition on a prime
All opinions m8 ;)
Tyson is liked because don king was the ultimate promoter..King lined up the bums and Tyson did what any guy with knockout power would do he knocked them out...that's pretty much it..Tyson had some extremely valuable tools that would have made him dominant, but he lacked the mental aspects and he was a coward as far as fighting guys who could take his best shot (according to every trainer that ever trained him) meaning that he could dish it out, but couldn't take it...
he didn't beat anyone worth mentioning...the only thing he ever did was win the heavyweight crown at 20, but that was more timing than anything else..holyfield, lewis, bowe all would have beaten berbick...
Tyson was nothing more than boxing's version of a boy band...his following is simply generated from masterful promotion and advertisement by his handlers..that's it, none of the people he beat did anything but get knocked out and quit the sport all together after that..and when he finally faced the real heavys of his generation he was beaten soundly, and its extremely convienent for anyone who supports tyson as being great to say (well he was past his prime) his prime was when he was 20-22 when he was knocking out all them bums then when he lost to douglass is prime was over at 23....when really what happened was, the fighters weren't going down so easily anymore and he actually had to box to win a fight and couldn't mentally do it..
true...he was the closest you could come to a sure bet.....you didn't bet against him unless you were insane....at least until Rooney, D'amato, Atlas and Roach were gone......Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
I get tired of the "who did Tyson beat " arguement ,
Because regardless of who he was fighting against, you could just see his skill, his movement, his speed and power , no HW rolled , ducked and punched like him, it was just amazing.
You can say it is easy to look good against crap opposition but it isn't easy to look as good as he did.
HE HE HE HE HE HE HE HE HE HE!! know what i mean HarryQuote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorilla
Exactly mate - it amazes me how people's memories are not capable of forgetting all of the crap that came after Douglas and just focus on his Prime, However short that was.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Bigragu
I ask people, if he wasn't that great, why did nobody since Ali, and nobody since create so much excitement and get talked about so much. Mid to late 80s people talked about his boxing, so he wasn't famed for his life outside the ring. He was 1-42 with the bookies to beat Douglas, when has ANY fighter ever been that favoured
It's becuase he was an incredible fighter and just coz he is shit now and basically has been shit for the last 18 years doesn't setract from the fact that at his best he was amazing
...and last point that I always make.....NOT one boxing expert in the world would've had Tyson outside their top 5 heavyweights of all time if asked after the Spnks fight. So that is the end of the argument really, becuase what happended after is irrelevant if we are talking about "Prime"
So were would you rank Tyson on the best heavyweights in the history of the sport. an as far as his domination i count the years of him being champ which was 2 years 1988-1990 but you could feel different about i guess but what i meant by his rain was the 2 years he was champion.
prime tyson loses to holyfiled 10 out 10 times..and prime lewis beats him 10 - 10 aswell so i dont see how he could possibly be rated higher than either one of them..
Big H i didn't mean his prime i meant his career as a whole i don't think he is on the top ten list.