Mike Tyson why do people hold him so high

[Punisher136]

I need to find the report that was done in about 1989, where all the boxing writers had Tyson either 1,2 or 3 with Ali & Louis in their all time lists. If you ak them all now, they would have changed their mind. It's short term memory

Thats because if tyson would've kept up his success after being the youngest champ in history, he could've had well over 30 successful defenses and upwards of 100 career wins but what they saw wasn't the beginning of something great, it was the plateau and eventual downward spiral of the biggest waste of talent in the history of the sport.

[BIG H]

I need to find the report that was done in about 1989, where all the boxing writers had Tyson either 1,2 or 3 with Ali & Louis in their all time lists. If you ak them all now, they would have changed their mind. It's short term memory

Thats because if tyson would've kept up his success after being the youngest champ in history, he could've had well over 30 successful defenses and upwards of 100 career wins but what they saw wasn't the beginning of something great, it was the plateau and eventual downward spiral of the biggest waste of talent in the history of the sport.

But when you talk about 'Prime' it is about that moment in time and how good they were then. Not what could, should or would've happend.

[Punisher136]

I need to find the report that was done in about 1989, where all the boxing writers had Tyson either 1,2 or 3 with Ali & Louis in their all time lists. If you ak them all now, they would have changed their mind. It's short term memory  

Thats because if tyson would've kept up his success after being the youngest champ in history, he could've had well over 30 successful defenses and upwards of 100 career wins but what they saw wasn't the beginning of something great, it was the plateau and eventual downward spiral of the biggest waste of talent in the history of the sport.

But when you talk about 'Prime' it is about that moment in time and how good they were then. Not what could, should or would've happend.

Part of being a great boxer is finding a way to win and maintain success when you're on the decline. Longevity is a huge factor for greatness. Having one or two good years can be done by pretty much anybody (especially fighting some scrubs) but when you are challenged by something outside (personal problems) or inside (age/ superior opponent) the ring, you have to overcome it. A prime has to be around long enough so that some one can say "Thats the best he's ever been". Nobody else in the history of boxing had a prime in their first five years. In fact saying that a boxer was at his best before 5 years in the business would be considered a joke if it was said about anybody else. Some people could take tua's "prime" (one fight against ruiz and some other scrubs) and say he was a ko machine and would've destroyed any ATG. You have to continue to have success after you're prime or you're just another boxer.

[BIG H]

Agree with a lot of that - see my post on last page about difference between 'The Greatest' and 'The Best'

[Punisher136]

So he had 2 year prime where he either beat ok people

Most people know my feelings on this, but just wanna pick up on the point above:

Most champions that have dominated an era, did not face GREAT opposition and people will happily put them in their top 10 lists If you have an argument about Tyson it cannot be based on his opposition or you would have to apply to virtually every dominant champion in history - coz the heavyweight division has traditionally only ever had 1 great fighter in each era (with the exception of the early seventies and ninieties)

Proof in point - check the opposition of............

Jack Dempsey
Rocky Marciano
Jack Johsnon
Joe Louis
Sonny Liston
Larry Holmes

................................................

I actually posted a list of great heavyweights and what company they had in their division and it was something to think about i'll try and find it again.

[BIG H]

Big H i didn't mean his prime i meant his career as a whole i don't think he is on the top ten list.

I would have 2 lists, one would be 'THE BEST' which would be who would beat who if each of the great heavyweights were to meet on their very best night.

...and the other list would be 'THE GREATEST' which would take into consideration, Lonjevity, domination, coming back form adversity etc etc.

I could make an argument for Riddick Bowe and Buster Douglas being on THE BEST list, on the basis that not many Heavyweights in history would beat the Douglas that beat Tyson or the Bowe that Beat Holyfiled (first time) but neither of them would be anywhere near my greats list

It depends what rules you use to compile your list.

I meant this post m8

[ICB]

Big H i didn't mean his prime i meant his career as a whole i don't think he is on the top ten list.

I would have 2 lists, one would be 'THE BEST' which would be who would beat who if each of the great heavyweights were to meet on their very best night.

...and the other list would be 'THE GREATEST' which would take into consideration, Lonjevity, domination, coming back form adversity etc etc.

I could make an argument for Riddick Bowe and Buster Douglas being on THE BEST list, on the basis that not many Heavyweights in history would beat the Douglas that beat Tyson or the Bowe that Beat Holyfiled (first time) but neither of them would be anywhere near my greats list

It depends what rules you use to compile your list.

I meant this post m8

Actually you may not believe this BIG H but i actually done topic about Tysons era where his opposition wasn't as bad as everyone says im not sure but he probabaly had umm maybe 5th best hw era im not sure though its hard to compare eras from that many years ago.

[BIG H]

You should do a 'Best' list and a 'Greatest' list - I reckon they would be very different

[ICB]

You should do a 'Best' list and a 'Greatest' list - I reckon they would be very different

Sorry mate but im having dumb moment at the moment lol do you mean best list and greatest list of there opposition or the boxers themselves ??

[Punisher136]

Here you go Big H

I'm gonna try to make a list to prove my point about the heavyweight division. This list will only include those that a majority of people agree on being hall of famers.

Late 1800's:
Johnson

1910- late 20's:
Dempsey
Tunney
Johnson

1930's-late 40's
Johnson (over hill by now)
Louis
Baer
Marciano (early days)

1950's
Liston
Louis (overhill)
Marciano


1960's-70's (the golden era):
Clay/ Prime Ali
Liston
Frazier
Foreman
Norton
Holmes

1980's:
Holmes (overhill)
Tyson
Holyfield (lightheavy)
Lewis (just getting started)
Bowe (just getting started)

1990's:
Holmes (overhill)
Tyson (overhill)
Foreman (overhill)
Holyfield
Lewis
Bowe

2000's (damn we need new people ):
Holmes (overhill)
Lewis (overhill)
Tyson (done)
Holyfield (overhill)
Bowe (overhill)
Toney (overhill and mildly brain damaged)

Now this list probably needs to be revised alittle but i think i make my point about competition in the heavyweight division.

[BIG H]

You should do a 'Best' list and a 'Greatest' list - I reckon they would be very different

Sorry mate but im having dumb moment at the moment lol do you mean best list and greatest list of there opposition or the boxers themselves ??

Boxers themselves e.g

'THE BEST' which would be who would beat who if each of the great heavyweights were to meet on their very best night.

'THE GREATEST' which would take into consideration, Longjevity, domination, coming back form adversity etc etc.


Like I said, I I could make an argument for Riddick Bowe and Buster Douglas being on THE BEST list, on the basis that not many Heavyweights in history would beat the Douglas that beat Tyson or the Bowe that Beat Holyfiled (first time) but neither of them would be anywhere near my greats list

See the diff

[BIG H]

Here you go Big H

I'm gonna try to make a list to prove my point about the heavyweight division. This list will only include those that a majority of people agree on being hall of famers.

Late 1800's:
Johnson

1910- late 20's:
Dempsey
Tunney
Johnson

1930's-late 40's
Johnson (over hill by now)
Louis
Baer
Marciano (early days)

1950's
Liston
Louis (overhill)
Marciano


1960's-70's (the golden era):
Clay/ Prime Ali
Liston
Frazier
Foreman
Norton
Holmes

1980's:
Holmes (overhill)
Tyson
Holyfield (lightheavy)
Lewis (just getting started)
Bowe (just getting started)

1990's:
Holmes (overhill)
Tyson (overhill)
Foreman (overhill)
Holyfield
Lewis
Bowe

2000's (damn we need new people ):
Holmes (overhill)
Lewis (overhill)
Tyson (done)
Holyfield (overhill)
Bowe (overhill)
Toney (overhill and mildly brain damaged)

Now this list probably needs to be revised alittle but i think i make my point about competition in the heavyweight division.

CC Mate

[ICB]

You should do a 'Best' list and a 'Greatest' list - I reckon they would be very different

Sorry mate but im having dumb moment at the moment lol do you mean best list and greatest list of there opposition or the boxers themselves ??

Boxers themselves e.g

'THE BEST' which would be who would beat who if each of the great heavyweights were to meet on their very best night.

'THE GREATEST' which would take into consideration, Longjevity, domination, coming back form adversity etc etc.


Like I said, I I could make an argument for Riddick Bowe and Buster Douglas being on THE BEST list, on the basis that not many Heavyweights in history would beat the Douglas that beat Tyson or the Bowe that Beat Holyfiled (first time) but neither of them would be anywhere near my greats list

See the diff

Ahh now i get you i think you did a topic for that while ago

Fraizer that beat Ali in 71

Foreman that beat Frazier

Ali that beat Williams

Lewis that beat Ruddock or Golota

Tyson that beat Biggs

Holmes that beat Shavers in 1st fight

Bowe that beat Holyfield

Ike that beat Tua

[BIG H]

You should do a 'Best' list and a 'Greatest' list - I reckon they would be very different

Sorry mate but im having dumb moment at the moment lol do you mean best list and greatest list of there opposition or the boxers themselves ??

Boxers themselves e.g

'THE BEST' which would be who would beat who if each of the great heavyweights were to meet on their very best night.

'THE GREATEST' which would take into consideration, Longjevity, domination, coming back form adversity etc etc.


Like I said, I I could make an argument for Riddick Bowe and Buster Douglas being on THE BEST list, on the basis that not many Heavyweights in history would beat the Douglas that beat Tyson or the Bowe that Beat Holyfiled (first time) but neither of them would be anywhere near my greats list

See the diff

Ahh now i get you i think you did a topic for that while ago

Fraizer that beat Ali in 71

Foreman that beat Frazier

Ali that beat Williams

Lewis that beat Ruddock or Golota

Tyson that beat Biggs

Holmes that beat Shavers in 1st fight

Bowe that beat Holyfield

Ike that beat Tua

See you DO have Tyson top5 of all time

[Punisher136]

I have constantly said that a tyson on his best night beats or gives an atg a run for their money. Now saying that, i believe that he would really struggle against bigger heavyweights with a good jab that can control the ring.