Quote Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al View Post
Quote Originally Posted by ross View Post
Mike Tyson on all time lists can be rated for a few different things. Some say its down to career achievements but then why would Foreman be rated higher? He only made 2 successful defences. If its impact on the sport then only Ali rates higher and Mikes impact was all positive until he ran in to King, he was spokesperson for the FBI, the New York police dept, he had his own computer game, he advertised pepsi etc whereas Ali gained his by refusing to be drafted to Vietnam.

If its on an actual who beats who then no way could you have the likes of Marciano who was getting dropped by old light heavies or Frazier, Norton, Holmes and probably a fair few more ahead of Mike. Mike gets rated down because its not cool to have him high or you just look like you know nothing about boxing because "Mike Tyson was just a bully brawler with no technique" which is the usual crap spouted by wannabe experts.
Foreman may have only made 2 defences , but was beaten by Clay and all time
great , Tyson lost to Douglas
After he achieved more than Foreman and Marciano.

Yes he lost to Douglas but only after he had proved beyond any doubt he was the best fighter in the world and had some experts saying he was going to be on a par with Ali as the greatest. Why dyou think the Douglas fight is the biggest shock upset ever in boxing? Its because Mike was thought of as unbeatable.