Lets end the Mike Tyson debate

[BIG H]

Sure he had a weaker era than most done.

Did he?

Weaker than Dempsey's Louis' Marciano's Liston's Holmes', Wlad's?

[bradlee180]

That weak era talk is basically bull$#!t...

The ones not suited to be professional boxers are weeded out all along, and never make it to the world stage.
Most people don't even consider being boxers; they're weeded out immediately.

Would-be tough guys with no training who think they can fight because they won a few bar brawls against other non-trained drunken guys never even have the interest nor discipline to set foot in a gym and see what real fighting is all about.

Beginning the 1st day a young interested guy sets foot in the gym, the weeding out process continues as most quickly quit the gym when they see it's not like the Rocky films. Most never have a single amateur bout before they quit.
The tougher ones spend years in the unpaid amateur ranks among about 54 thousand other amateur fighters. It's a world-sports. In 2008, 77 countries sent teams to the Olympics. The weeding out continues.

There's approximately 16 thousand licensed professional boxers right now.

In a single weight class like Heavyweight for example, you've got about a thousand licensed professional Heavyweight fighters, and the brass ring at the top is 8 million up to 46 million per fight, you're gonna get the cream of the crop, the best the world has to offer. Weak era, my rosy red rectum. The money and the competition have ALWAYS been there in open-world wide competition designed to reveal the best.

If a Heavyweight Champion doesn't have a style or charisma that galvanizes the fans, so what? It doesn't take away from the fact that he must be pretty damn good to be #1, the King of All Boxing because none of these other 15 lighter weight classes can f*<k with the Heavyweight Champ of the World.

[bradlee180]

^ See? Guys like this get weeded out. And too many guys imagine they look like Tyson hitting the bag when in reality, they appear to others more like this unfortunate soul in the clip...

[Mr140]

You know people saying that Rudduck was better choice then Foreman i dont really understand because it is not like Rudduck beat anyone of note. As for Moorer he hit like a truck and was fast as fuck and Foreman still pulled it off i don't care how Tyson takes a punch Foreman lays one on him good enough Foreman wins the fight. As for a younger Foreman losing to Ali no way in hell Tyson pulls that off he was a dumb fighter but gifted psychically. Foreman has beat some one at least close to Tyson has Tyson fought any one or thing like a Foreman and won tell me because i cant think of one.

[Beanflicker]

he was a dumb fighter but gifted psychically.

Just by saying that, I can tell you have absolutely no grasp on the talent and skill that Tyson had.

I've seen a lot of people here talk about Tyson like he was some plodding pressure fighter like Joe Frazier, who would take 3 blows to land one. Like all he had was a big punch.

If you feel that way, you shouldn't be talking about the guy.

[Beanflicker]

And if you're one of those guys who thinks Tyson's era was shit, tell us what era (besides Ali's era) was considered better.

[erics44]

so hows this thread going? have we ended the debate?

[El Kabong]

Sure he had a weaker era than most done.

Did he?

Weaker than Dempsey's Louis' Marciano's Liston's Holmes', Wlad's?

His best foes before he tangled with Holyfield and Lewis in "their era" were a light heavyweight Michael Spinks, an older faded champion in Larry Holmes, and 2 guys who were just solid contenders but never really got the most out of their ability in Bruno & Ruddock.

Dempsey fought Gene Tunney who was one of the best p4p fighters to ever live...as a champion he was lazy something like 5 title defenses or so...the good life got to him.

Louis had 25 successful title defenses and that could have been more had the war not cost him a few years.

Marciano wasn't even really a heavyweight but he was undefeated as one, undefeated vs some very good albeit older fighters

Liston meh his era was weak

Holmes had a lot of good young fighters in his era and they just tried for too much too quickly and also there was a horrible drug epidemic sweeping the lower levels of society at that time as well so a lot of those guys didn't reach their potential.

Wlad's era isn't the best but like Louis he's just going to have to make the best of it and go for quantity. However he does have some younger guys that could offer some interesting matchups, we'll just have to see how they pan out.

[Boxer4life]

Sure he had a weaker era than most done.

Did he?

Weaker than Dempsey's Louis' Marciano's Liston's Holmes', Wlad's?

His best foes before he tangled with Holyfield and Lewis in "their era" were a light heavyweight Michael Spinks, an older faded champion in Larry Holmes, and 2 guys who were just solid contenders but never really got the most out of their ability in Bruno & Ruddock.

Dempsey fought Gene Tunney who was one of the best p4p fighters to ever live...as a champion he was lazy something like 5 title defenses or so...the good life got to him.

Louis had 25 successful title defenses and that could have been more had the war not cost him a few years.

Marciano wasn't even really a heavyweight but he was undefeated as one, undefeated vs some very good albeit older fighters

Liston meh his era was weak

Holmes had a lot of good young fighters in his era and they just tried for too much too quickly and also there was a horrible drug epidemic sweeping the lower levels of society at that time as well so a lot of those guys didn't reach their potential.

Wlad's era isn't the best but like Louis he's just going to have to make the best of it and go for quantity. However he does have some younger guys that could offer some interesting matchups, we'll just have to see how they pan out.

On paper, Tysons resume wasn't impressive compared to some of the greater champions, but god dammit we saw what the man can do, and he would fare prett damn great against anyone in any era, thats what the debate really comes down to, is more skill, not so much resume of opponents, accomplishments. etc..

[El Kabong]

On paper, Tysons resume wasn't impressive compared to some of the greater champions, but god dammit we saw what the man can do, and he would fare prett damn great against anyone in any era, thats what the debate really comes down to, is more skill, not so much resume of opponents, accomplishments. etc..

Tyson's record always left me wanting him to have more fights especially in the 1990's and early 2000's. There were a boatload of guys he could have fought and that would have been good matches and great matches even.

Riddick Bowe
Shannon Briggs
Ray Mercer
Tommy Morrison
Chris Byrd
Ike Ibeabuchi
David Tua
Hasim Rahman
Oliver McCall
Vitali
Wlad
Sam Peter
Michael Moorer
Michael Grant
Gerry Cooney
George Foreman
James Toney
Lamon Brewster
Sergei Liakhovich
John Ruiz

I could list fighters for days...and sure lots of them would be short work for Tyson but as Tyson aged a lot of those guys would have given him hell and would have beaten the dog piss out of him due to his slowing down and ineffectiveness at being a pressure fighter later on in his career.

I'm more realistic about Tyson's career than the fanboys, but still you'd love to see him fight anyone and everyone his style was just such a good matchup for any other style.

[erics44]

On paper, Tysons resume wasn't impressive compared to some of the greater champions, but god dammit we saw what the man can do, and he would fare prett damn great against anyone in any era, thats what the debate really comes down to, is more skill, not so much resume of opponents, accomplishments. etc..

Tyson's record always left me wanting him to have more fights especially in the 1990's and early 2000's. There were a boatload of guys he could have fought and that would have been good matches and great matches even.

Riddick Bowe
Shannon Briggs
Ray Mercer
Tommy Morrison
Chris Byrd
Ike Ibeabuchi
David Tua
Hasim Rahman
Oliver McCall
Vitali
Wlad
Sam Peter
Michael Moorer
Michael Grant
Gerry Cooney
George Foreman
James Toney
Lamon Brewster
Sergei Liakhovich
John Ruiz

I could list fighters for days...and sure lots of them would be short work for Tyson but as Tyson aged a lot of those guys would have given him hell and would have beaten the dog piss out of him due to his slowing down and ineffectiveness at being a pressure fighter later on in his career.

I'm more negative about Tyson's career than everyone else, but still you'd love to see him fight anyone and everyone his style was just such a good matchup for any other style.

i made some changes to your post

[El Kabong]

i made some changes to your post

I'm not "more negative" about Tyson, I'm pragmatic about him. But hey you must feel horrible because he demolished Bruno twice

[erics44]

i made some changes to your post

I'm not "more negative" about Tyson, I'm pragmatic about him. But hey you must feel horrible because he demolished Bruno twice

every fighter has his bogey man, nowt you can do about that

and youre about as pragmatic as a conker

[Beanflicker]

I think a lot of Tyson's opponents are criminally underrated, best example is Tony TNT Tucker who was an absolute beast. Huge power and amazing boxing skills. Tyson was the only guy to beat him until he was 35 or so, when he lost to a young Lennox Lewis.

[Beanflicker]

Who the fuck did Gene Tunney beat besides Dempsey himself? Greb, a middleweight? Who also beat him? Sheeesh, these old timers get a free pass on everything.