Mike Tyson is TBE

[Max Power]

Arreola doesn't jab and tie up, use his legs, he'd just trade punches and get clubbed out of there by a prime Tyson, you're dumb. Tony Tucker would have outboxed the Elephant seal as well.

That's just a ridiculous opinion.

Arreola is a well skilled boxer, just as good as most. And I'm not taking anything away from Tucker because he was good fighter too. The main difference between Arreola and most are physical advantages (height, power, weight and a very solid chin+stamina) and relentless aggression/pressure and heart. Imagine Tyson's victims vs Arreola? He'd knock there block off as well!

Now Tyson is one of my favourite all time boxers and I rate him highly, but there is GREAT questions on how he would tolerate the adversity of the current HW's, and 00's HW's and even some of the bigger+stronger ones which he didn't fight.

My opinion IS that he'd beat most of them, remember that. But he isn't destroying any opponent like Arreola who is skilled+big.

I noticed you making quips about Arrreola's fat weight. Do we really have to go there again?

In short it's the HW division, there are advantaged and disadvantages of being both lean and chubby at HW, as you said it is NOT athletics!

And almost too stupid to mention but I guess I'll have to.. Being chubby does not equate to less muscles.

Arreola is fast, Arreola has stamina, that is what's important. So who gives a F if he isn't ripped!

Now Tyson might be TBE for all I know but let's not try and sell that he destroys the upper echelons of boxing ina few rounds here ey!

You are in the upper echelons of annoying. Do you think Adamek was a better HW than Tony Tucker? Was Travis Walker more dangerous than Razor Ruddock in your opinion? It's very possible a few of Tysons victims would have beaten Arreola. You think the guy is a really hard fight for anyone who ever lived, most people don't rate him as a great fighter at all, because he wasn't quite. Not really sure what else there is to say.

I would personally pick Arreola to beat Razor and Tucker. Both would be tough fights for Arreola though.

Arreola wasted 230+lbs Travis Walker wtf! He got KD'd once, got up and destroyed.

Adamek is definitely better HW than Tucker wtf!

Tucker was long and had skills but he was very lazy. HW Adamek had great chin, was stronger than Tucker, faster and had better reflexes.

I don't care what others rate him. 99% of boxing fans AND "experts" are retarded. I evaluate fighters purely on fact, all mythology excluded.

Tyson afficianados are fond of saying it's not just the competition he fought but the way he beat them too and I agree. The opposite is also true though. It's not just that Arreola lost to top competitors but HOW well he lost to them too.

Tyson lost to lesser competition than Arreola has.

Everytime Tyson DID fight comparable opponents to those that beat Chris, he DID lose.

[Max Power]

Unbelievable!

I jump on this thread seriously contemplating Mike Tyson being TBE HW.

And then dudes just go too far by claiming he thrashes every better+giant opponent imaginable.

No need for such extremes!

[p4pking]

Arreola doesn't jab and tie up, use his legs, he'd just trade punches and get clubbed out of there by a prime Tyson, you're dumb. Tony Tucker would have outboxed the Elephant seal as well.

That's just a ridiculous opinion.

Arreola is a well skilled boxer, just as good as most. And I'm not taking anything away from Tucker because he was good fighter too. The main difference between Arreola and most are physical advantages (height, power, weight and a very solid chin+stamina) and relentless aggression/pressure and heart. Imagine Tyson's victims vs Arreola? He'd knock there block off as well!

Now Tyson is one of my favourite all time boxers and I rate him highly, but there is GREAT questions on how he would tolerate the adversity of the current HW's, and 00's HW's and even some of the bigger+stronger ones which he didn't fight.

My opinion IS that he'd beat most of them, remember that. But he isn't destroying any opponent like Arreola who is skilled+big.

I noticed you making quips about Arrreola's fat weight. Do we really have to go there again?

In short it's the HW division, there are advantaged and disadvantages of being both lean and chubby at HW, as you said it is NOT athletics!

And almost too stupid to mention but I guess I'll have to.. Being chubby does not equate to less muscles.

Arreola is fast, Arreola has stamina, that is what's important. So who gives a F if he isn't ripped!

Now Tyson might be TBE for all I know but let's not try and sell that he destroys the upper echelons of boxing ina few rounds here ey!

You are in the upper echelons of annoying. Do you think Adamek was a better HW than Tony Tucker? Was Travis Walker more dangerous than Razor Ruddock in your opinion? It's very possible a few of Tysons victims would have beaten Arreola. You think the guy is a really hard fight for anyone who ever lived, most people don't rate him as a great fighter at all, because he wasn't quite. Not really sure what else there is to say.

I would personally pick Arreola to beat Razor and Tucker. Both would be tough fights for Arreola though.

Arreola wasted 230+lbs Travis Walker wtf! He got KD'd once, got up and destroyed.

Adamek is definitely better HW than Tucker wtf!

Tucker was long and had skills but he was very lazy. HW Adamek had great chin, was stronger than Tucker, faster and had better reflexes.

I don't care what others rate him. 99% of boxing fans AND "experts" are retarded. I evaluate fighters purely on fact, all mythology excluded.

Tyson afficianados are fond of saying it's not just the competition he fought but the way he beat them too and I agree. The opposite is also true though. It's not just that Arreola lost to top competitors but HOW well he lost to them too.

Tyson lost to lesser competition than Arreola has.

Everytime Tyson DID fight comparable opponents to those that beat Chris, he DID lose.

You seem to evaluate fighters purely on industrial glue. Facts? What are you even talking about. A fact is that Arreola has never beaten anyone, absolutely nobody who wasn't mediocre. How WELL he lost to Vitali or Adamek, what does that mean, how does he possibly get the type of credit you seem to give him for those fights? He just took a beating against an old Vitali and showed heart to hang tough(Chisora did much better) and Adamek was a former LHW!!! Michael Spinks is another guy who could have likely beaten Adamek and Arreola in his day, or maybe even in the shape he fought Tyson. Hard to say since he wouldn't have been intimidated by two guys he was better than as opposed to a great HW. Who did Tyson lose to that was comparable to Adamek? Travis Walker had Arreola in a lot of trouble in the first round, I brought that up because he was a bit like a badly faded Tyson without the chin. I feel like the biggest dope for even responding to you

[Max Power]

You seem to evaluate fighters purely on industrial glue. Facts? What are you even talking about. A fact is that Arreola has never beaten anyone, absolutely nobody who wasn't mediocre. How WELL he lost to Vitali or Adamek, what does that mean, how does he possibly get the type of credit you seem to give him for those fights? He just took a beating against an old Vitali and showed heart to hang tough(Chisora did much better) and Adamek was a former LHW!!! Michael Spinks is another guy who could have likely beaten Adamek and Arreola in his day, or maybe even in the shape he fought Tyson. Hard to say since he wouldn't have been intimidated by two guys he was better than as opposed to a great HW. Who did Tyson lose to that was comparable to Adamek? Travis Walker had Arreola in a lot of trouble in the first round, I brought that up because he was a bit like a badly faded Tyson without the chin. I feel like the biggest dope for even responding to you

Objectively Adamek and Holyfield are fairly comparable. Balanced skillset, great conditioning, very strongly build for smaller guys, strong chins carried to HW and both good vs larger+good opposition.

Yeah Michael Spinks might have been able to run around for 12 rounds with Arreola like he did vs Holmes and like Adamek did vs Arreola, why not! He also could have been found and banged out! Adamek and Spinks is an interesting match. Again, I think Adamek is MUCH better than Spinks! Spinks was basically a walking knockout for a good+hard punching HW who was aggressive.

Yeah Walker got the drop on Arreola. Can happen when your fighting a guy 230+lbs! Arreola got back up to stop Walker within 3 rounds! So much for your precious Travis Walker! LOL

Again, Tyson did have a good chin overall, but I have to point out that Douglas and Holyfield were renowned featherfists themselves. Ok Buster was heavy and he accumulated a lot of punches on Tyson sure, but Holyfield has one of the most abysmal KO performances of all champs and was not heavy at all! Back to Buster, he fought a good fight but let's be honest, he was no fucking LEnnox Lewis. It should come as no surprise that the fearless Arreola could concievably perform well also, especially since Arreola cracks far harder.

We both seem to agree on Tyson being very special here, the degree of which however we're in stark contrast.

Tyson is balls deep against any boxer approaching 6'4" with good skills, a hard chin and a hard punch. He would "grind out" wins against these opponents.

All these memories of boxers flying left and right from Tyson has to be adjusted to the truth. Those opponents were EITHER china-chinned, featherfisted, bummy or small, or sme combination thereof (with some exceptions of course). Chris Arreola, for example exhibits NONE of those qualities.

[p4pking]

You seem to evaluate fighters purely on industrial glue. Facts? What are you even talking about. A fact is that Arreola has never beaten anyone, absolutely nobody who wasn't mediocre. How WELL he lost to Vitali or Adamek, what does that mean, how does he possibly get the type of credit you seem to give him for those fights? He just took a beating against an old Vitali and showed heart to hang tough(Chisora did much better) and Adamek was a former LHW!!! Michael Spinks is another guy who could have likely beaten Adamek and Arreola in his day, or maybe even in the shape he fought Tyson. Hard to say since he wouldn't have been intimidated by two guys he was better than as opposed to a great HW. Who did Tyson lose to that was comparable to Adamek? Travis Walker had Arreola in a lot of trouble in the first round, I brought that up because he was a bit like a badly faded Tyson without the chin. I feel like the biggest dope for even responding to you

Objectively Adamek and Holyfield are fairly comparable.

Good night Max, not biting any more.

[Max Power]

Good night Max, not biting any more.

Fine.

I watched Adamek vs Grant last night.

If you can get back to me with where the clear superiority of Holyfield over Adamek is, then I'll declare defeat.

I know.. Invite Adamek over for dinner, accidentally splash some black paint over him, put a yankee flag in his hand and THERE'S ya bloody Holyfield!

[Master]

Adamek would beat a prime Tucker. You need to take another sabatical.

Maybe we are picking on you liking Arreloa, I like him too, but do not elevate him to be a great.

Of course Tyson is not TBE, that would be Ali.

[Max Power]

Adamek would beat a prime Tucker. You need to take another sabatical.

Maybe we are picking on you liking Arreloa, I like him too, but do not elevate him to be a great.

Of course Tyson is not TBE, that would be Ali.

I'm not elevating him to being a great. I clearly distinguish between fighters I like, great fighters now, ad great fighters historically.

We don't KNOW if Mike could be TBE but we can be sure as hell that Muhammad Ali isn't.

I can't think of many top 10 fighters in the last 20 years that Muhammad Ali could beat!

The ONLY reason anybody even considers Muhammad Ali against current competition, is because he and his opponents were once CALLED Heavyweights at different points in history. That's the only thing they have in common.

The 60's/70's HW division is analogous to today's Cruiser division.

It then becomes completely clear that todays Cruisers are faster, stronger, more athletic and better skilled in general than the "cruisers" of those times.

Mike Tyson and Chris Arreola are natural HW's as we describe them today, they never boxed professionally sub200.

[Max Power]

Anyway I am sick of the Arreola comparisons, move on!

He's a favourite current boxer of mine, because he is colourful, always produces exciting fights and is a tough mofo by any measure.

I picked him to beat Stiverne, one of the hardest punchers of all time with an iron chin and 1st rate counterpunching skills himself. A fight which Arreola WAS mauling him in until the end remember!

So what!

Objectively he is still one of the best HW's in the world. Losing to the best might make you worse than the guy you lost to, NOT worse than you are though!

Your old time favourite boxers have multiple losses to chinny, featherfist cruiser bums, remember that! I never seen Arreola lose to ANYBODY like that!