Is mike Tyson that great ?

[roberto duran legend]

If u are to be called a great fighter , surely you must of beat some really good or great fighters ? . Does iron mike really deserve to be called great ? . After all his best wins were over , Michael Spinks who was a great light heavy , but still a small heavyweight , and a faded legend in Larry Holmes . NOT the best resume is it . I know he was fearsome in his prime , but he never beat a top world class fighter in there prime .He was outclassed by Holyfield TWICE , and Lewis when long past his best . Bowe would have kicked his ass as well .

[Master]

The 1986-1989 version was a great fighter, skill, speed, size, power and charisma. He obliterated the opposition. You could count one one hand how many big punches he took. He was awesome. Losing Rooney screwed his technique, having King manipulate him with yes men fed his ego and destroyed him.

[imp]

Plus 3 years lost in prison.

[Master]

Plus 3 years lost in prison.

He was going by then, he was described as the oldest 24 year old in the world when he fought toe to toe with Rudduck. The prison life made him weaker and he put on too much muscle to compensate and was really finished and hollow. Holyfield exposed that brutally.

[ICB]

Plus 3 years lost in prison.

He was going by then, he was described as the oldest 24 year old in the world when he fought toe to toe with Rudduck. The prison life made him weaker and he put on too much muscle to compensate and was really finished and hollow. Holyfield exposed that brutally.

Actually he was better in the 1st Razor Ruddock fight, there was nothing wrong with him in that fight at all. He was like a machine going to the body and head, apart from getting rocked in 1 round, which can happen to anyone.

He was great in that fight he looked like the Mike Tyson of old. But in the rematch he was looking too much for the one punch KO, and wasn't setting up the punches as good as he did in there 1st meeting.

[Master]

Plus 3 years lost in prison.

He was going by then, he was described as the oldest 24 year old in the world when he fought toe to toe with Rudduck. The prison life made him weaker and he put on too much muscle to compensate and was really finished and hollow. Holyfield exposed that brutally.

Actually he was better in the 1st Razor Ruddock fight, there was nothing wrong with him in that fight at all. He was like a machine going to the body and head, apart from getting rocked in 1 round, which can happen to anyone.

He was great in that fight he looked like the Mike Tyson of old. But in the rematch he was looking too much for the one punch KO, and wasn't setting up the punches as good as he did in there 1st meeting.

we always disagree on this, whilst it was an exciting fight, Tyson pre-Douglas would have avoided those punches and there was little head movement. He was good in that first fight but not great.

[porkypara]

IMO Tyson only clain to greatness is the way he destroyed his opponents (most 2nd rate)in a way never witnessed in boxing in the past and the fact he won the world title at the age of just 20.

Tyson was luck the division was week when he was on the way up.

If he was on the way up in the early 90s instead of early/mid 80s i think the Tyson myth might never have been created.

What I will say for Tyson though is that he is the most exciting boxer to ever step in the ring.

[Dark Lord Al]

No

[JonesJrMayweather]

I used to think he was the most overrated fighter in history. But then I couldn't think of anyone he could have faced that he didnt before the Douglass fight. Then the prison thing. I mean had he only beaten Douglass, then many would have saw the Holyfield-Tyson fight instead of Holyfield-Douglass, and he may have been viewed differently.

I still think that any version of Holy beats any version of Tyson. But his prison fall off definitely helped Lennox Lewis in giving him more time to grow into his prime, because i think Tyson would have beaten the small version of lennox.

[Drago]

its a tough one as in his prime there really wasnt any great competition for him, but if there had of been we may never of seen those devastating ko's that are forever in our mind!

[marbleheadmaui]

Almost everyone who becomes the true heavyweight king is serious business. That is an enormous accomplishment.

Now once you limit the discussion to guys who have done that? Well, one thing is the guy had only two defenses. That's certainly fewer than most.

As for the devastation Tyson wrought? That's impossibly overblown.

[Eloking]

What I prefer in Tyson was his ability to put fear in his opponent's head. I'm pretty sure that nobody have ever been more feared than Tyson in the history of boxing.

Also, he was small, really small for a heavyweight. But him and d'Amato was able to change this weakness into one of his biggest strenght with the peek-a-boo style and his awesome step-in.

And I agree that d'Amato's dead was the beginning of his downfall. It's a pity we couldn't see more of him.

[IamInuit]

Using the same premise essentially is Marcinao great? How about Holmes? Both men benefited by perfect timing.

[greynotsoold]

Tyson was pretty tough, because, unlike many HWs, his offense was based off his defense.
But here's where it all gets funky. Losing Rooney was not what made him slip, because Rooney was just a drunken stumble bum to begin with. Tyson was done in by the peek-a-boo style.
In that manner of fighting, reflexes are key. Patterson ditched it, but Tyson never did. What he needed, once his reflexes slipped, was not somebody seeking to return him to his "old" style, especially not Rooney (who was never otherwise involved with anyone of any success).
What he needed was a trainer that would point him in a direction that would enable him to succeed.
And no HW will ever be "great" because HWs are typically so abysmally skilled.

[Mr140]

Greynotsold that is the dumbest post i have ever seen posted ever. We in saddo are all dumber from reading let god have mercy on your soul when you die dude.