Respect for the list, but Marciano's opposition has got to be more questinable than TysonsQuote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Printable View
Respect for the list, but Marciano's opposition has got to be more questinable than TysonsQuote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
I Like Your List I Just Believe Ali Was A Great Heavyweight So was Louis ;D
Marciano's opposition might have been questionable when you think about the Walcott, Louis, Charles, Moore names on his record but what about LaStarza and Layne? Those guys were tough customers and Rocky blasted them
gotta go with lewis. prime tyson looked so good because of who he was hitting back then. tyrell biggs(no punch, weak chin) tony tubbs (featherfisted and overweight) frank bruno (no stamina, weak chin) carl williams (weak chin again) michael spinks (one of the greatest lightheavyweights of all time, but not a heavyweight). its not that lewis has fought great opponents, but you judge who is the best when they fight the other worthy fighters of their generation. tyson was indeed passed his prime when he fought lewis, but so was lewis. tyson was even passed his prime when he fought holyfield, but again so was holyfield. lewis fought and beat tyson,holyfield, and tried desparetly to go bowe in the ring(whom he had already beat for the gold in the olympics).lewis was just the better fighter. lewis would have exposed what those fighters in the 80' that tyson knocked out couldnt, his lack of mental strength and heart. tyson has to be one of the most overrated heavyweights ever. he barely cracks the top 20 of most boxing historians/experts lists.
Can't say I've seen any footage of the LaStarza fights, but I know that there was talk of a gift decision to Rocky in the 1st fight and that the 2nd fight was close before Rock knocked him out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
and Tyson never had gifts or close fights???
FRANS BOTHA!!!!
Tyson before the 4th
Gotta disagree with you here Lewis would dominate him though it would be closer early on and Tyson would last longer but Lewis' size and power as well as boxing ability gives him the edge to Tyson's combinations and fast handsQuote:
Originally Posted by USA LOVES THE KLITSCHOS
I agree Lyle - as long as he didn't get caught in one of those early rounds. If he did, fight could end early in Tyson's favor.
Well my point was that you said Marciano blasted La Starza ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
..and no I don't remember Tyson ever been helped by the judges, although he should've been disqualified against Botha
Tyson in his prime won comfortably on points against any opposition that went the distance....Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Frans Botha didnt face a prime Tyson, he faced a much reduced Tyson...
Fine Tyson was soooo great ONLY Buster Douglas could beat him....oh but that wasn't his "PRIME" I guess he's just the best fucking think ever since he beat Michael "JACK" Johnson....I believe the real JACK JOHNSON would have put up more of a fight eventhough he had been dead for over 20 years!!!
If you are talking about PRIME Tyson then Rocky is FAR AND AWAY the better fighter. He fought LaStarza who was better than anyone Tyson fought, he fought Joe Louis who was better than Old Larry Holmes, he fought Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles who were better than Michael Spinks who didn't want to fight at all. Rocky fought Jersey Joe Walcott who was more dangerous than Bruno or anyone else Tyson fought.
Tyson's prime was brought to you by TV and fueled by glass jawed BUMS!
Who did Tyson fail to meet between 1986-1989 that he could've met.
He baet the best of his era - and check out how old and how many fights Walcott and Moore were when they foguth Marciano.
Evander Holyfield
Oliver McCall
Gerry Coetzie
Michael Dokes
Greg Page
Tim Witherspoon
Anyone is better than who he fought
O.K Since we were talking about 1986-89 which is when Tyson dominated and when he fought all those people you claim were bogus, here's what I make of your listQuote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Evander Holyfield - In 1986 Holyfiled weighed 190 pounds, didn't step up for Heavyweight title fight till 91
Oliver McCall - Only turned pro in 85 and didn't even reach NABF level till 92 - has also lost to Bruno & Tucker WHO TYSON BEAT
Gerry Coetzie - Retired in 86 after been blown away in one round by the same Frank Bruno that you classed as being one of Tyson's lowly opponents
Michael Dokes - was fighting stiffs between 86 and 89 and was stopped by holyfield in 89
Greg Page - went 6-4 between 86-89 and lost to Joe Bugner in the process - hardly begging to fight for title. He has also lost to Seldon, Douglas, Tubbs & Ruddock - ALL OF WHOM TYSON BEAT
Tim Witherspoon - knocked out in a round by Bonecrusher (WHO TYSON BEAT) in 86 and hardly fought for next 3 years - although I do agree this would've been a test for Tyson
Why bother arguing with him Big H, he's said the same fucking things about Tyson for probably YEARS, and obviously isn't interested in actually changing his opinion no matter what anyone says.. IF he has seen enough footage of a prime Tyson, and a prime Marciano, and he thinks Rocky was FAR AND AWAY the better fighter, well, then let him have his illusions at least he'll stop posting the same thing over and over if you don't reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Holyfield was just waiting for the oppertunity OBVIOUSLY he could step it up...anyways HOW was he going to do worse than Michael Spinks from 85-89????
McCall turned pro in 85 Tyson turned pro in 85 SHMUCK
Coetzie was still a NAME in 86
Dokes was better than ANYONE Tyson fought from 85-89...Yeah HOLYFIELD beat him...like he's a bum or something
Page was still a NAME from 86-89
Witherspoon still a good veteran during those years
I mean Tyson was taken the distance by James Tillis!!!
Mitch Green did a good job vs him
Tony Tucker did a good job vs him
Would those other guys be better than Mike Jameson, Steve Zouski, or Trevor Berbick???
YES, they would have put up a fight
I never said Tyson was bad, I just said Rocky was better, he challenged himself Tyson didn't, Rocky came from the clutches of defeat to KO someone for the win Tyson didn't, Rocky got off his ass to win, Tyson didn't, Rocky never lost, Tyson did.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pking
For my top 10 and top 15 I don't think Tyson could beat ANY of them...it aint just Rocky
1. Louis
2. Marciano
3. Ali
4. Foreman
5. Frazier
6. Holmes
7. Johnson
8. Dempsey
9. Liston
10. Walcott
11. Charles
12. Lewis
13. Bowe
14. Holyfield
15. Tyson
16. Norton
17. Patterson
18. Braddock
19. Tunney (beat Dempsey twice but retired after 1 more defense)
20. Baer
I agree that Tyson's cleaning out of a division was against only slightly better than average opposition and that beating of Spinks and a 38 yr old Holmes are really not the greatest of achievements. But Marciano's resume is only slightly better in the name department. I do give Rock credit for spectacular heart and determination, but I can't rank the guy that high simply b/c I don't think he could beat almost any of the top HW's that came after him. There are at least seven fighters on your list below Rock that I would give big odds over him. I know head to head isn't the only criteria in ranking fighters but it has to play into it somewhat.
Yes mccall turned pro in 85 and had two fights, infact Tyson had more fights in his first 12 months than McCall had in his first 5 years, and McCall didn't fight anybody with a winning record until 1989 - a fight that he lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Page & Coetzee were names, well so was Michael Knight and Devon Miles, but names mean sh1t when you have been getting beaten by every fukka you fight and getting KOed in a round by Bruno
And Dokes was better then Ruddock wasn't he ??? (so what if the fight was in 1990)
Green lost 9 of the 10 rounds against Tyson and Tucker won 3 or 4 at best. Tucker by the way was 35-0 and didn't lose for another 6 years after the Tyson fight, so he was quite handy ;)
and Tyson had been a pro a year when he fought 8 year veteran Tillis, who had floored the likes of Greg Page, so no disgrace going the distance.
Stick to politics Lyle old son, coz your boxing knowledge sucks ;)
coetzie would of lost in round against tyson the fat version of witherspoon would lost badly but if were talking about witherspoon that looked great against holmes then thats different tyson would had hes hands full with that version of witherspoon and to be honest i never thought mccall was that good anyway he had great chin but this is same mccall that just won against 45 year old larry holmes and i thought holmes got decision to be honest.
A little cheeky but very agreeable arguments. Im a huge Tyson fan but dont get into these threads too much these days because they just go on and on and I just hear the same things from the usual suspects. If some people are so stuck into an opinion then it just becomes a chore trying to argue something you are equally adamant about.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
:coolclick: again for some quality pro Tyson sentiments, Big H, long may this thread run!! ;D
Tyson beat Douglas?!?!?...was that in the rematch? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Regarding Mike's opposition he fought what was out there and from 86-88 there was not a great deal of talent...but what he faced he dominated as a great fighter should...My reasons for not considering Mike and ATG are basically:
1) Excuses; there are ton's of excuses why Mike was considered beyond his peak at 22 years old. A bad marriage, misguided management, blah, blah blah...Welcome to bigtime boxing, these are just excuses. Marciano, Louis, Ali, Dempsey, Johnson, etc.. all had some sort of management/ personal issues that never became an excuse...
2) Inability to adapt;Mike fought one way and one way only, he never could adapt...He was perhaps the best at the Cus D'Amato style EVER no denying that...but being a one way fighter always leads to disaster once your style is neutralized...Did he peak at 21 years old or did Buster Douglas show the world how to beat Mike??? Long before Mike the rule to beat a Cus D'Amato fighter was to walk him backwards...This became painfully obvious when Mike lost to a well worn Holyfield...D'Amato fighters don't throw punches going backwards, look at old fights of Patterson to see the other D'Amato prodigy...
3)Losses: while many will argue that Tyson was beyond his prime for the douglas fight (three fights removed from Spinks)...Tyson Lost to a "B-C" level fighter, he was outboxed, outhustled, out-hearted by a guy that was going through more inner turmoil than he, but Buster sucked it up...No ATG ever lost to a bum like Douglas and any that did lose to a lesser opponent avenged those loses...that's an ATG
4)Longevity; Thos who argue Tyson is an ATG say that his prime was from 86-88, which I won't deny...so from his 19-22 year of age he was the best, that is far to short a legacy to be considered an ATG...that means he peaked as a boxer before his physical strength peaked(medically around 25), certainly his maturity and before he got to face his generations best opposition...
IMO...Mike was a Fighter that had great potential and at times fought great...but certainly can't be considered an ATG
CC back ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by miles
What do we ask of heavyweights??? 1) How's his chin? 2) Punching power? 3) Stamina? 4) Boxing ability 4) Defense? 5) Have they proven themselves vs a NAME opponent? (took Tyson until his 20th fight to fight a NAME guy in Quick Tillis a guy Witherspoon KO'd in 1, Page KO'd in 8, Thomas KO'd in 8 all PRE Tyson and Mike went the distance with him??? WOW that punching power)Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Michael Dokes by the way lasted longer with a younger Evander Holyfield than Tyson did with an Older one who had just finished 3 brawls with Riddick Bowe!!!
OOOOH so now we're stretching it to 1990 are we??? But that's "POST PRIME" Tyson!!!!
In that case here are some MORE names he COULD have fought in 1990
GEORGE FOREMAN...oh but Mikey was too scared of Big George
RAY MERCER
Pierre Coetzer
Tommy Morrison
BigH you are as stupid as you are ugly
I don't intend on winning this debate because after all Tyson fans have always been good at MAKING EXCUSES
Hahaha - now that made me laugh ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Ia int a fan, I hate the bloke, just think that everybody pays to much notice to how shite he became, because anybody that watched his early fights will know that he completely changed in every possible way from Douglas onwards ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
im not tyson fan at all but tyson would of destroyed tommy and coetzer mercer would of been tough thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
lemme see who tyson could of fought
greg page
tim witherspoon
ray mercer
riddick bowe
i cant think at moment mind has gone blank
people will laugh at me but i think prime bowe would beat tyson
Yes Mercer had a chin and he could box
I'm not saying Coetzer and Morrison or Dokes or Witherspoon or whoever would BEAT Tyson I'm saying it would have been more competitive than oh Marvis Frazier, Michael Spinks, Carl Williams, OLD Larry Holmes...give me a break people talk about how bad Marciano's opposition was it ain't like he had a choice but he still CHALLENGED himself!
Rooney, Cayton, and Jimmy Jacobs really held Tyson back from some worthy opposition, sure hindsight is 20/20 but iif Tysn always fought the best available then why when he came out of prison did he not fight Riddick Bowe? Why didn't he fight Michael Grant when he was seemingly unstoppable? Why didn't he jump right into a fight with Lewis? Why didn't he fight Tommy Morrison when he was doing well? Michael Moorer???
He never fought McCall! He never fought Mercer! Both of those guys had GREAT chances at beating him simply because they would last the distance with him
I absolutely agree Bowe would have whipped Tyson's ass
i see bowe recently and was suprised how much skills he had he could fight well on inside had great jab had fast hands for big man and good power and had alot of stamina which is rare for big man and had heart of a lion and had great chin and i think all these factors would beat tyson and ps if anyone thinks bowe hasnt got heart or good chin watch golota fights and holyfield fights
Of course! He's never been KO'd, he's not been down much, he beat Holyfield the worst a Prime Holyfield could be beaten. Bowe during his prime was one of the best fighters I've ever seen
agreed cc
Bowe and Mercer would not have been much opposition if we are talking about 1986-89Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
The Tyson revisionists always talk about Tyson's post jail career, which even I as a huge Tyson fan, recognise was a completely different Tyson...Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
I think most even great boxers dont come back from a 3 year+ layoff the same fighter.....
Of course Bowe beats a post jail Tyson, but he would have fits with a pre jail model Tyson....
Mercer would have been fine 89-90Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Bowe just started in 1990 so nah not then but in the mid 90's Bowe would have blasted Tyson
Yes it was "different" but how much so? I think we really saw Tyson's downfall after Rooney left but even that was minimal. It all came down to heart and dedication
name me a list of 10 great fighters who went into the slammer and came out managing to truly add further greatness to their legacy....Im sure the list would be minimal (unless Britkid emerges from the archives!! ;D)...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
HMMMMM...
Ron Lyle, Sonny Liston, George Foreman, Jameel McCline, and so on learned to fight after prison. It ain't like Tyson had anything to do other than get in shape in prison dude.
Tyson AT LEAST could have fought Moorer or Morrison after prison...if they were such beatable boxers then he would have had no trouble with them.
Briggs! Grant!....He fought Golota why not other guys that were good but McNeely, Botha, Seldon....he just didn't have the heart. I think he liked prison because it gave him an excuse to not be good when he came back.
Ali had a LONG layoff and he added significantly to his legacy!!!!