Was there any boxer in history more athletic than Mike Tyson?

[zhubin]

Ray Lewis? bigger, stronger, faster, and meaner then Jim Brown

Shaq if he had the mentality?
Or Wilt Chamberlain?
Michael Vick? They could all box IMO if they wanted to.

Also Muhammad Ali IMO wasn't as good of an athlete as Roy JOnes Jr, same with Ray Robinson they had more heart and a better chin, but Roy had better handspeed than either, better balance, and body control.

It's all relative i guess. Roy certainly has to be considered one of the best pure athletes in the sport. But Ali's speed and footwork for a heavyweight (actually, ANY weight) was mind boggling. At his prime (late 20's up to right before he stopped fighting because of the draft)...Ali was a thing of beauty to behold. But Roy Jones certainly will always be near the top of the list for pure athleticism. Tyson was a monster too. Obviously his incredible strength and speed...but he actually was a solid technical fighter (solid defense, cordination and accuracy as well) under Cus d'amato. We sometimes forget that because of what a soap opera his life and later career became.

[holmcall]

Jim Brown was a great all-around athlete who played lacrosse, football, basketball, and even ran track at Syracuse University. He may have been the greatest lacrosse and football player ever). Of course, he went on to professional football immortality. It's pretty difficult to argue that he was not the greatest athlete in American history. Jackie Robinson, Gene Conley, Deion Sanders, Dave DeBusschere and Bo Jackson (Bo could DO!), were pretty darn good all-around athletes as well. So were Jackie Jensen, Bob Mathias and, of course, Jim Thorpe. There were many other high-profile athletes who were multi-sports stars.


But one who flew under the radar for whatever reason (and a friend of mine) was a 6'4" 230 pounds, well-muscled, strong, and fast athlete who graduated from San Diego High School in 1952. He quickly became the youngest player in the history of the National Football League. He was one of the few who made it to--let alone star in- the NFL without playing college football (which may account for his low profile). Amazingly, prior to playing football, he had signed up with the old St. Louis Browns as a power hitting outfielder and spent the summer playing Class B ball for the Stockton Ports of the California League before forsaking baseball for football.


High School

He was one of the greatest high school athletes in American sports history and was recruited by the Harlem Globetrotters for his basketball skills. When they came to town, they all but begged his parents to let them take him with them. He was the only baseball player folks can recall hitting balls out of Balboa Stadium on a consistent basis, shots that reportedly even made Hall of Famer Ted Williams take notice. He was scouted by the NFL during high school. What's more remarkable, he accomplished this during a time when Jackie Robinson was breaking the color barrier in professional baseball. He recalled during an interview with the late Reggie Grant:



"But baseball and track were during the same season, so I'd go to the track meet, maybe put the shot a couple of times, and then change in the car and go to play baseball. . . . And every now then and I'd fill-in and run the relays" (Reggie Grant, "Mr. Versatility: the youngest player in NFL history," undated, 2005 Business Networking Charity Golf Tournament Champions Crowned

All in all, he won twelve varsity letters. Among other things, he ran the 100-yard dash in a blazing 9.6 seconds. He high jumped 6 feet and put the shot 57 feet 9--1/4 inches (a San Diego High School record that may still stand).



He was Southern California's "Prep Player of the Year" in 1950-51 and named on All-America High School team.


Football



His professional football career began in 1952 when San Francisco 49er Coach Buck Shaw showed up at his home in San Diego, contract in hand. His parents had to sign the contract, and he made a whopping $10,000.00 that first year. He was a world-class athlete long before players were fairly compensated for their skills. He credited his success as a football player (and later as a boxer) to his superior conditioning. As a nineteen-year-old, his chance to play came during training camp when the starter was injured, and he made the most of it.



In his first game, he played against the then world champions, the Detroit Lions. It was a team loaded with several all-pros and future Hall of Fame players. He sacked quarterback Bobby Layne an astounding ten times -- yes 10 times- for sixty-seven yards in losses. His performance was so inspirational that his teammates awarded him the game ball. It was the first time a 49er rookie was so honored. All this before the NFL kept official stats on things like sacks. He quickly became an NFL star, and a younger brother eventually would play in the AFL for the New York Jets. He and the great Joe "The Jet" Perry were the only black players on the 49ers at that time and sometimes had to stay in different hotels than their white teammates.


He played five seasons for the 49ers (1952--53 and 1955--57) and two for the Oakland Raiders (1960--61). In between, he boxed.


Boxing



He started boxing at the age of eleven or twelve. As a youngster, he would get up early before school and jog down to Archie Moore's home. He would then train with the Mongoose, go back home, shower, eat, and go to school. He earned extra money for his family during WWII by boxing at military bases near San Diego.



He started off his boxing career with a draw against one Fred Taylor, but then reeled off ten straight knockout wins. But, as often is the case in the less-than-scrupulous world of boxing, his managers and promoters moved him too fast, and he was taken out by Charlie Norkus in 1954 in a pier six brawl in which both fighters were down. Powell, 11-0-1 at the time, was young and naive to the all-too-familiar, sleazy elements surrounding him. Norkus was 24-12 and had already beaten tough Danny Nardico twice--the first time in a thrilling cult classic involving 8 knockdowns. He was one of those exciting types. If he didn't t get you, you would get him.

The highlight of his boxing career happened in March 1959 when he knocked out the number-two ranked boxer in the world, 6'4" Cuban Nino Valdes who was 46-16-3 coming in. Nino, who was on a 6-fight win streak, was decked three times. Another great win was a redemptive one over the rugged Norkus in a 1958 rematch.


He fought Muhammad Ali (then Cassius Clay) in 1963 in Pittsburgh before 17,000 fans, and like so many of Ali's other opponents, felt the sting of his insults. Ali predicted he would KO him in round three and did just that, but he earned $12,000 more than he'd ever been paid for an entire season as a pro football player. In 1964, he was paid $10,000 to fight Floyd Patterson, to whom he lost in six.


Eventually, he would finish with a record of 25-11-3 (19 KOs). Among his opponents were Norkus, Harold Carter, Patterson, Roger Rischer, Mike DeJohn, Johnny Summerlin, Roy Harris, and, of course, Ali. It was an imposing list, to say the least. He never fought an amateur fight.

Arguably, he did not reach his full potential because of that which distinguished him; namely, being a two-sport man. Going back and forth between football and boxing, he would put on weight for one and lose it for the other. Had he been able to focus on boxing, there is no telling how far he could have gone.


Yes, Jim Brown was a great all-around athlete. However, CHARLEY POWELL never served his apprenticeships. He never boxed amateur, nor did he attend college. He simply jumped from high school to professional stardom. In any discussion of who was the greatest athlete, I submit Charley Powell's name should be included.

Known as "Mr. Versatility," he was never really picked up by the public or the press, but I knew about him. If you are ever in San Diego, visit the Breitbart Hall of Champions and look for the Powell brothers, Art and Charlie. Art was a four-time all-star for the New York Jets in the AFL.

[Trainer Monkey]

Ray Lewis? bigger, stronger, faster, and meaner then Jim Brown

Shaq if he had the mentality?
Or Wilt Chamberlain?
Michael Vick? They could all box IMO if they wanted to.

Also Muhammad Ali IMO wasn't as good of an athlete as Roy JOnes Jr, same with Ray Robinson they had more heart and a better chin, but Roy had better handspeed than either, better balance, and body control.

It's all relative i guess. Roy certainly has to be considered one of the best pure athletes in the sport. But Ali's speed and footwork for a heavyweight (actually, ANY weight) was mind boggling. At his prime (late 20's up to right before he stopped fighting because of the draft)...Ali was a thing of beauty to behold. But Roy Jones certainly will always be near the top of the list for pure athleticism. Tyson was a monster too. Obviously his incredible strength and speed...but he actually was a solid technical fighter (solid defense, cordination and accuracy as well) under Cus d'amato. We sometimes forget that because of what a soap opera his life and later career became.

Oh Tyson was beauty of a beast,Ali was just Ali. You cant even use his fight tapes for training purposes, its pointless. He's still called the greatest,because he was the greatest. They dont call it the Jerry Quarry Shuffle

[mrodub]

Ali is one of the greatest sports personalities of all time but not the greatest boxer alot of people confuse the two.
I do think tyson was the most gifted heavyweight of all time and could have gone down as the best of all time but never will now, there has never been a heavyweight with the speed power athleticism aggression that wa as elusive and hard to hit as tyson not ali not anyone joe louis was the cloosest
I will not comment on the smaller divisions becuse my knowledge of them is not strong enought to compare them against what i know about the heavyweights.

[ICB]

Ray Lewis? bigger, stronger, faster, and meaner then Jim Brown

Shaq if he had the mentality?
Or Wilt Chamberlain?
Michael Vick? They could all box IMO if they wanted to.

Also Muhammad Ali IMO wasn't as good of an athlete as Roy JOnes Jr, same with Ray Robinson they had more heart and a better chin, but Roy had better handspeed than either, better balance, and body control.

It's all relative i guess. Roy certainly has to be considered one of the best pure athletes in the sport. But Ali's speed and footwork for a heavyweight (actually, ANY weight) was mind boggling. At his prime (late 20's up to right before he stopped fighting because of the draft)...Ali was a thing of beauty to behold. But Roy Jones certainly will always be near the top of the list for pure athleticism. Tyson was a monster too. Obviously his incredible strength and speed...but he actually was a solid technical fighter (solid defense, cordination and accuracy as well) under Cus d'amato. We sometimes forget that because of what a soap opera his life and later career became.

Oh Tyson was beauty of a beast,Ali was just Ali. You cant even use his fight tapes for training purposes, its pointless. He's still called the greatest,because he was the greatest. They dont call it the Jerry Quarry Shuffle

The greatest don't struggle against Doug Jones, Henry Cooper. And the greatest should have 10 losses on his record.

[zhubin]

I'm not going to go into the whole "is ali the greatest" debate. It's all personal opinion. Bottom line...Ali's politics and outside of the ring personality will always make him unpopular with certain people. As far as a fighter with 10 losses should not be considered the greatest...that is pure bs to me. Ali, like almost every great champion (ray robinson included), fought WAY past his prime. So there will simply be more losses on his record...even against fighters he shouldn't have lost to. Which leads me to the Larry Holmes comment. So Larry fought a shot Ali and wins...and questions his skills Ali would have danced circles around Larry Holmes in his prime.

[ICB]

I'm not going to go into the whole "is ali the greatest" debate. It's all personal opinion. Bottom line...Ali's politics and outside of the ring personality will always make him unpopular with certain people. As far as a fighter with 10 losses should not be considered the greatest...that is pure bs to me. Ali, like almost every great champion (ray robinson included), fought WAY past his prime. So there will simply be more losses on his record...even against fighters he shouldn't have lost to. Which leads me to the Larry Holmes comment. So Larry fought a shot Ali and wins...and questions his skills Ali would have tortured Larry Holmes in his prime.

But thats different SRR had over 200 fights, so 10+ losses on his record is still an amazing record. Muhammad Ali didn't even have a quarter of the amount of fights SRR did.

So of course if the decision's hadn't gone Muhammad Ali's way he would nowhere be considered the greatest. He should of lost to Henry Cooper by DQ because smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time.

He should have atleast lost 2 out of 3 with Ken Norton, although you could make an argument he lost all 3. He got a draw against Doug Jones although it very easily could of gone Doug Jones's way. And the 2 fights with Henry Cooper/Doug Jones, Muhammad Ali wasn't that far from his peak, considering he won the title off Sonny Liston not long after these 2 fights, in arguably one of his best performances.

And he for certain lost to Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers. Your telling me if Muhammad Ali hadn't got all of these gift decision's, you would still consider him the greatest ?

As for your last comment thats ridiculous, Larry Holmes could compete with any version of Muhammad Ali. He is a better technical fighter than Muhammad Ali, he had a better jab. And he is pretty equal with Muhammad Ali in most attributes.

[zhubin]

I'm not going to go into the whole "is ali the greatest" debate. It's all personal opinion. Bottom line...Ali's politics and outside of the ring personality will always make him unpopular with certain people. As far as a fighter with 10 losses should not be considered the greatest...that is pure bs to me. Ali, like almost every great champion (ray robinson included), fought WAY past his prime. So there will simply be more losses on his record...even against fighters he shouldn't have lost to. Which leads me to the Larry Holmes comment. So Larry fought a shot Ali and wins...and questions his skills Ali would have tortured Larry Holmes in his prime.

But thats different SRR had over 200 fights, so 10+ losses on his record is still an amazing record. Muhammad Ali didn't even have a quarter of the amount of fights SRR did.

So of course if the decision's hadn't gone Muhammad Ali's way he would nowhere be considered the greatest. He should of lost to Henry Cooper by DQ because smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time.

He should have atleast lost 2 out of 3 with Ken Norton, although you could make an argument he lost all 3. He got a draw against Doug Jones although it very easily could of gone Doug Jones's way. And the 2 fights with Henry Cooper/Doug Jones, Muhammad Ali wasn't that far from his peak, considering he won the title off Sonny Liston not long after these 2 fights, in arguably one of his best performances.

And he for certain lost to Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers. Your telling me if Muhammad Ali hadn't got all of these gift decision's, you would still consider him the greatest ?

As for your last comment thats ridiculous, Larry Holmes could compete with any version of Muhammad Ali. He is a better technical fighter than Muhammad Ali, he had a better jab. And he is pretty equal with Muhammad Ali in most attributes.

These are all your opinions. Others, myself included, will disagree with you on some of them. It's true...the Jones and Cooper fights where close and controversial. Ali was a young a fighter then and didn't exactly put on his best performances. As far as his fights against Young and Shavers...please! He was clearly past his best by then. He went into those fights not only past his prime, but also not well conditioned at all. I personally think the Shavers fight was a draw...and the fact that it was that close when Ali was so past his prime...is an attribute to Ali's great heart. And it's true...Holmes was technically a great fighter. But Ali in his prime was so much faster, such a great athlete...he would have beaten Holmes IMO. Again, we all have are opinions. And we aren't always going to agree.

[DaxxKahn]

I'm not going to go into the whole "is ali the greatest" debate. It's all personal opinion. Bottom line...Ali's politics and outside of the ring personality will always make him unpopular with certain people. As far as a fighter with 10 losses should not be considered the greatest...that is pure bs to me. Ali, like almost every great champion (ray robinson included), fought WAY past his prime. So there will simply be more losses on his record...even against fighters he shouldn't have lost to. Which leads me to the Larry Holmes comment. So Larry fought a shot Ali and wins...and questions his skills Ali would have tortured Larry Holmes in his prime.

But thats different SRR had over 200 fights, so 10+ losses on his record is still an amazing record. Muhammad Ali didn't even have a quarter of the amount of fights SRR did.

So of course if the decision's hadn't gone Muhammad Ali's way he would nowhere be considered the greatest. He should of lost to Henry Cooper by DQ because smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time.

He should have atleast lost 2 out of 3 with Ken Norton, although you could make an argument he lost all 3. He got a draw against Doug Jones although it very easily could of gone Doug Jones's way. And the 2 fights with Henry Cooper/Doug Jones, Muhammad Ali wasn't that far from his peak, considering he won the title off Sonny Liston not long after these 2 fights, in arguably one of his best performances.

And he for certain lost to Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers. Your telling me if Muhammad Ali hadn't got all of these gift decision's, you would still consider him the greatest ?

As for your last comment thats ridiculous, Larry Holmes could compete with any version of Muhammad Ali. He is a better technical fighter than Muhammad Ali, he had a better jab. And he is pretty equal with Muhammad Ali in most attributes.

These are all your opinions. Others, myself included, will disagree with you on some of them. It's true...the Jones and Cooper fights where close and controversial. Ali was a young a fighter then and didn't exactly put on his best performances. As far as his fights against Young and Shavers...please! He was clearly past his best by then. He went into those fights not only past his prime, but also not well conditioned at all. I personally think the Shavers fight was a draw...and the fact that it was that close when Ali was so past his prime...is an attribute to Ali's great heart. And it's true...Holmes was technically a great fighter. But Ali in his prime was so much faster, such a great athlete...he would have beaten Holmes IMO. Again, we all have are opinions. And we aren't always going to agree.

What I always find amazing is the fact everyone who detracts from Ali always seems to disreguard the fact he had not yet hit his best in the Cooper/Jones fights but if it was any other fighter they would bring that up first off...and the fact Ali is not the only fighter to have contraversial wins...

why is it Cooper is always brought up?....Even if Cooper did get the win that day fact is when all was said and done he still was not better then Ali overall

[ICB]

I'm not going to go into the whole "is ali the greatest" debate. It's all personal opinion. Bottom line...Ali's politics and outside of the ring personality will always make him unpopular with certain people. As far as a fighter with 10 losses should not be considered the greatest...that is pure bs to me. Ali, like almost every great champion (ray robinson included), fought WAY past his prime. So there will simply be more losses on his record...even against fighters he shouldn't have lost to. Which leads me to the Larry Holmes comment. So Larry fought a shot Ali and wins...and questions his skills Ali would have tortured Larry Holmes in his prime.

But thats different SRR had over 200 fights, so 10+ losses on his record is still an amazing record. Muhammad Ali didn't even have a quarter of the amount of fights SRR did.

So of course if the decision's hadn't gone Muhammad Ali's way he would nowhere be considered the greatest. He should of lost to Henry Cooper by DQ because smelling salts wern't allowed in the UK at that time.

He should have atleast lost 2 out of 3 with Ken Norton, although you could make an argument he lost all 3. He got a draw against Doug Jones although it very easily could of gone Doug Jones's way. And the 2 fights with Henry Cooper/Doug Jones, Muhammad Ali wasn't that far from his peak, considering he won the title off Sonny Liston not long after these 2 fights, in arguably one of his best performances.

And he for certain lost to Jimmy Young, Earnie Shavers. Your telling me if Muhammad Ali hadn't got all of these gift decision's, you would still consider him the greatest ?

As for your last comment thats ridiculous, Larry Holmes could compete with any version of Muhammad Ali. He is a better technical fighter than Muhammad Ali, he had a better jab. And he is pretty equal with Muhammad Ali in most attributes.

These are all your opinions. Others, myself included, will disagree with you on some of them. It's true...the Jones and Cooper fights where close and controversial. Ali was a young a fighter then and didn't exactly put on his best performances. As far as his fights against Young and Shavers...please! He was clearly past his best by then. He went into those fights not only past his prime, but also not well conditioned at all. I personally think the Shavers fight was a draw...and the fact that it was that close when Ali was so past his prime...is an attribute to Ali's great heart. And it's true...Holmes was technically a great fighter. But Ali in his prime was so much faster, such a great athlete...he would have beaten Holmes IMO. Again, we all have are opinions. And we aren't always going to agree.

It doesn't matter if he was old or not in good shape against Earnie Shavers/Jimmy Young, the fact is these were two gift decisions. That Muhammad Ali clearly lost in alot of peoples eyes, and had he lost both of these fights it would of for certain took away some of his greatness.

And he would of been ranked lower in the all time rankings. If i think he lost the fights i mentioned then i have the right to call him overrated. And rank him lower in the all time rankings, because like you said its our opinions and IMO Muhammad Ali is overrated.

Its just like when RJJ lost when he was past his prime, to Tarver/Johnson it hurt his legacy even though he was clearly past his prime. Had he retired after the John Ruiz fight, he would of probably been top 10 fighter of all time, but because he carried on too long. He is probably just outside the top 20 now possibly.