
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
My dad and his friends didn't say that about Tyson and they were hardcore fans, because they felt it was way too early. And other boxing experts also felt that way.
Mate, given your dad argued that Haye would be the first white lineal HW champ of the world since Braddock, his opinion probably won't hold too much weight here.
Was any of your dad's friends a leading boxing pundit of the day? Otherwise it might be hard to sell them as boxing experts.
All my piss-taking aside, I do agree to a point, I think there is an idea that just because some people thought he might be the best in 1988, does not mean that we have to unilaterally accept that is how it was. Imo fighters should never be placed historically while still active. Otherwise you get opinions like that Kellerman article about RJJ being the best fighter ever, which in truth now looks pretty silly.
However, this works both ways. Writing someone who is active off as being the greatest can also look foolish. I remember reading an article by the great Nat Fleischer from around the time that Ali was banned from boxing. In it he argued that to consider Ali among the ten greatest HWs of all time was a ludicrous concept not even worth thinking about & how he couldn't even compare to the greats of a previous era.
Generally people always go too far one way or the other. The middle ground is where the truth is. Wow that could read like something Andre would say. I'm a sage.
* One last thing, H, you are very wrong about the excitement. All due respect to Tyson who might be the most exciting fighter to watch of all time, but he had nothing like the cultural impact of Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis or Ali. You could make a strong argument that Marciano had a greater impact.
Tyson was big, but not as big as those guys were in their time.
Bookmarks