Where does Iron Mike rank all time?

[Iron MikeyJ]

Many have different thoughts and feelings on this, IMO he is #2 All time behind Ali, and here is my reasoning. Mike was the prefect blend of speed and power, like no one before or after. You can argue that Ali and Patterson were faster. You could also argue that Forman and Shavers hit harder. But none of these guys possesed BOTH skills the way Mike did. Also many of his contemporaries commented on how great Mike's chin was, was it as good as Ali's? No probably not, but it sure as hell was better than guys like Lennox Lewis. Mike may have had some losses, but they were never one punch knock outs. Honestly Mike's only real weakness was his heart. If a fighter got out to a lead on Mike, they could beat him. He didn't have the resolve that guys like Ali and Frazier did. But to be fair, only a few fighters ever got a lead on him anyways.

A big knock that I hear against Mike is his competition. Many "experts" like to diminish his credentials by claiming that Mike fought inferior competition. To that I say BS. Mike fought anybody and everybody from his era there was to fight. His only real exceptions were Riddick Bowe and old Foreman. Which those fights not happening was not the result of anyone ducking anyone, it was just how it worked out. When Bowe and Holyfield were fighting, Mike was in prision, and when Mike was out, Bowe was damn near losing to Andrew Golota. Foreman wanted to fight Mike when Mike was champ, but he was by no means ready for Mike at that time. And when Foreman had the title, he wasn't exactly tryingto get Mike in the ring either. Honestly I think the 80's and 90's gets a bad rap as far as competition goes. Was it as good as the 60's and 70's? No. But IMO it is the 3rd best era of the heavyweight division, behind the 60's and 70's, and the 30's and 40's. But I would argue Mike fought tuffer opponents than guys like Jack Johnson, Rocky Marciano, or Jack Dempsey did. But they don't get knocked for their competition.

My final point is the who would beat who discussion. This is where a PRIME Tyson being trained by Kevin Rooney, would have given EVERY all time great fits, and IMO beat most of them. For sake of arguement, I will give you Ali. I do feel that a Prime Ali would have beat a Prime Tyson 7 out of 10 times they fought. Ali's style was perfect for beating Tyson. But lets vlook at everyone else. The only other fighter from Ali's era that I feel would have given Mike any real trouble was a Prime Foreman. Mike's speed and footwork could potentially win the fight, but it would have been epic to watch. It's really hard for me to claim a winner here. But the other guys like Frazier, Norton, Shavers and Spinks were taylor made for Mike. Honestly I don't think any of those guys get to decision against Mike, Frazier especially. His style and size would get him knocked out within 6 rounds against Mike. I just don't really see Frazier being able to stand toe to toe with Mike, and Frazier didn't know how to fight any other way. I think Mike would take him out just like Foreman did. Norton ALWAYS struggled against heavy hitters, he even admitted it himself in an interview I watched recently. He exceled against boxers like Ali, but guys like Foreman or Tyson would take him out easliy. Shavers would probably of been the tuffest fight for Mike out of these three, but again I feel Prime Mike's speed, footwork, and combinations would have won the day.

Now lets look at other all time great; Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Jack Dempsey, Sonny Liston, Larry Holmes and Jack Johnson. Joe Louis is probably the most complete fighter of these guys, but like all the "experts" say, "Styles make fights" and lets be honest here, Louis's style would not fair well against Mike. Louis had a very old school traditional style and I just don't feel that it would fair well against Mike's onslaught. I by no means think it would be an easy fight for Mike, but I do think Mike would probably hurt or drop Louis early in the fight, and either knock him out late or win by points. I just think Mike would jump out Louis, and Louis's confidence would be shot at that point. Mike vs Rocky Marciano would yave been an epic slugfest, but the Rock's height, weight, and build would not favor him in this match up. Lets be honest here, Mike was bigger, faster, and stronger than Rocky. also let me add, Mike never lost a slugout, he excelled in those fights. It's just hard for me to envision a way for Rocky to honestly beat Mike. Jack Dempsey would be very similiar to Rocky, but I give Rocky better chances than Dempsey. Again, Mike was bigger, faster, and stronger. Now Sonny Liston, Lenny's boy. Not to argue with you Lenny, but Mike would take him out IMO. Mike hit harder than Liston and was WAY faster. Mike also had MUCH better footwork. Liston's only real advantage here is his jab. Which he is known for having a great jab, but it was also a slow jab. It was not a fast jab like Ali or Holmes. I feel very strongly that Tyson would bob and weave around his jab, and come in and land hooks and uppercuts on Liston. Both Liston and Tyson have the same weakness, heart. I see Tyson getting around Liston's jab, only rock him a few times, and once Liston's confidence gets lowered, he would either quit or find some way out of the fight. I just don't see Liston having the skills or talent to be able to deal with Mike. Larry Holmes on the other hand would have given Mike some trouble. Holmes was the closest fighter to Ali, and as a result would have given Mike some trouble. Even though Mike DID beat Holmes, most experts don't give Mike much credit due to Holmes age. A prime Holmes would have given Mike a tougher fight, but a Rooney trained Mike would have been prepared for Holmes. Holmes was the fighter Mike was training his whole life to beat, so I give Mike a 7 out of 10 advantage over Holmes, because Holmes was good, but he was no Ali. Finally Jack Johnson, Johnson is the dark horse of boxing history. Even Ali once said that he doesn't know how he would have faired against Johnson. As a result, I can not call how a Tyson vs Johnson fight would go, so I'm calling it a coin toss.

These are my thoughts and feelings, I'm interested to hear others. No right or wrong answers, it's all speculation. But keep in mind I'm talking about a Prime Tyson trained by Kevin Rooney and under the guidance of Cus D'mato. IMO Tyson is the 2nd greatest Heavyweight of all time, but for this topic I say he is top 5 all time. Cheers mates, Iron MikeyJ has spoken.

[DR DOOM]

I went top 10, he is the #1 for my age group but I honestly don't have a proper grasp of what and who came before so I'll be safe and say top 10.

That fight where he knocks a guy out and then back in was fucking wowsers.

[Iron MikeyJ]

I went top 10, he is the #1 for my age group but I honestly don't have a proper grasp of what and who came before so I'll be safe and say top 10.

That fight where he knocks a guy out and then back in was fucking wowsers.

Trevor Berbick is probably who you are thinking of.

[Len Cnut]

I think you discount quite how hard and brutal people like Joe Louis and Jack Dempsey and them were, simply because we watch old footage and we don't get 50,000 action replays from HBO with mics under the ring to make every thwack sound so fuckin' loud. People like Jack Johnson used to knock people out and brush their teeth off his glove afterwards, Jack Dempsey did more damage to Jess Willard in one round of boxing than Mike Tyson did to all the fighters he never fought, I mean he fuckin' mangled Willard.

Joe Louis was a devastating, sharp, accurate fighting machine, he hit hard with both hands, has about the best professional record I've ever seen, Joe Louis was a fuckin' beast, he would've hit Tyson coming in with punches he never dreamt, Joe LOOOOOOOOOVED those little crouched, head moving in styles, Joe Louis had that short snap hook which you rarely see in boxing that if you don't have a heavy hand and strong forearms looks like a slap or a swat but if you do it fuckin' concusses people.

I hear a lot of this stuff, mostly from kids of the 80s about Tyson and how he's the greatest thing since sliced bread and on many many levels he is, at least for me anyway, love the guy but against a Joe Louis, or an Ali, or a Dempsey? I just don't see it. And quite frankly neither does anybody else apart from the aforementioned kids of the 80s.

Tyson can't be on their level and have a Holyfield to his record, two Holyfield losses, Tyson can't be on their level and have lost to Lennox Lewis, the biggest fight of his life save the one where he won the title, he unified the shit, he was undisputed, he was youngest ever, these things deserve notice...but he didn't sustain a career of high points like a Louis, like a Dempsey, like a Ali. Tyson basically rode his early quality (of which there was an abundance) to the hilt and then basically caved in when he couldn't be bothered anymore, someone like that can never be an all time great. post Buster Douglas he never beat a quality opponent. And there were solid stellar fights of his era that he never even fought, like Big Daddy Bowe. Not cuz Tyson ducked or was a chicken, far from it but whatever the reason, WHATEVER the reason...the shit never took place, that person can't be an all time great, he's just a guy with a couple of good records, Wilfred Benitez was like that.

End of the day a man is judged on his record, not on how many people we know he would've destroyed if he'd've not been a cunt and trained properly. I guess you could say a part of me is really bitter towards Mike Tyson and always will be. He was the great of my era...and what, he fucked it all up. Which says something about my era and him.

[Iron MikeyJ]

@Lenny,

So where do you put him then?

Am I a bias 80's kid? Perhaps. But I am a HUGE Boxing history fan, especially heavyweights, I've spent my time studing all the greats, I really have. I think because Mike did throw a lot of his potential away, some like to look down on him. You mentioned Jess Williard, he was a bum. He really was man. IMO thats like Tyson fighting Peter Mcneely. Maybe Williard was a little better than Mcneely, but not much. Sure Johnson destroyed him, but he should have. IMO that whole era of 1900~1920 is Jack Johsnon then everyone else. Once we get into the 1920's we get guys like Dempsey and Tunney who were legit, but before Dempsey it's really just Jack Johnson and a bunch of bums. Sure the time they fought in was brutual. Brutal rules, endless rounds, etc. But if you put a Prime Tyson back then, by those rules, he would have taken all those guys out within 12 rounds anyways. I just don't have a lot of respect for the competition of that era, sorry. Plus it was a very defensive era, thats why when Demspey came along everybody loved him He was the first guy to go out there and try to kick your ass. Before that it was punch, dance, hug, punch again, etc. You put Iron Mike in that enviroment going after the other guy as soon as the bell rang, its like releasing a tiger from a cage. They would have no defense for him.

Now guys like Joe Louis, as you mentioned, I get what your saying. Hey I'm from Michingan, we don't have statues of Joe Louis in Detroit for no reason. The man is a legend, for sure. You see Tyson vs Louis going one way, I see it another way. It is what it is, besides no wrong answers here.

I guess I go by eye test more than records. Yes records are important, but they are not everything IMO. Tunney took out Dempsey twice, but Tunney would get creamed by PLENTY of other greats. So what does that mean? Ali had 5 losses, but he is still the GOAT. Berbick destroyed Ali, and Tyson destroyed Berbick. Sure age played a role, but its still on his record.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Iron MikeyJ

[bacardimayne]

As someone with next to no boxing knowledge I see him as an overrated hack who benefited from fighting cans.

[The Sandman]

Top 5.

[Ace Nova]

Would have been top 5, had he sustained the success he had in his earlier/prime years.

The way things turned out, still top 10, imo.

[Len Cnut]

You mentioned Jess Williard, he was a bum. He really was man. IMO thats like Tyson fighting Peter Mcneely. Maybe Williard was a little better than Mcneely, but not much. Sure Johnson destroyed him, but he should have.

You might wanna brush up on your history cuz Jack Johnson lost to Jess Willard, he didn't beat him so if he was a bum that don't say much for Jack Johnson.

IMO that whole era of 1900~1920 is Jack Johsnon then everyone else.

Come on man...Sam Langford, Joe Jeanette?

Once we get into the 1920's we get guys like Dempsey and Tunney who were legit, but before Dempsey it's really just Jack Johnson and a bunch of bums. Sure the time they fought in was brutual. Brutal rules, endless rounds, etc.

130 round fights? (not that they all were!) In the open air? No neutral corner rule, extremely lax about thumbing, butting, even biting on occasion.

But if you put a Prime Tyson back then, by those rules, he would have taken all those guys out within 12 rounds anyways.

Yeah but a prime Mike Tyson wouldn't have late 20th Century skills back in the early 1900s would he so it really wouldn't work that way.

I just don't have a lot of respect for the competition of that era, sorry.

You should read up on it then cuz there was a lot more than just Jack Johnson...a helluva lot more. The aforementioned Sam Langford and Joe Jeanette are just the point of the tip of the iceberg.

Plus it was a very defensive era, thats why when Demspey came along everybody loved him He was the first guy to go out there and try to kick your ass. Before that it was punch, dance, hug, punch again, etc.

Yeah well if you're gonna be fighting as many rounds as they did you better fuckin' pace yourself

You put Iron Mike in that enviroment going after the other guy as soon as the bell rang, its like releasing a tiger from a cage. They would have no defense for him.

I do not necessarily agree with you here.

I guess I go by eye test more than records.

I'm sure you understand why thats ridiculous.

Yes records are important, but they are not everything IMO.

I'm afraid they are.

Tunney took out Dempsey twice, but Tunney would get creamed by PLENTY of other greats. So what does that mean? Ali had 5 losses, but he is still the GOAT. Berbick destroyed Ali, and Tyson destroyed Berbick. Sure age played a role, but its still on his record.

Yeah but the counterpoint to that is Tunney came at Dempsey with a style of boxing that, at that time, had never been seen before. And also a style by the way that many considered cowardice, there was serious talk in those days of fighters like that not getting paid, which casts an interesting light on your comment about hug, hold and dance. A record being everything doesn't necessarily mean that you can't swallow a loss...it shows WHO you fought too, which is almost as important and thats what i mean by records are everything. Like i can't call a Money Mayweather an all time great, simply didn't have the competition to warrant it, same for a Joe Calzaghe. The problem is the shit on Tysons record that is a let down isn't due to circumstances you can't do anything about, he wasn't shot when he fought Holyfield or Lewis, he wasn't too old, he wasn't fighting hugely younger opponents, he just took L's.

[LyndaRose]

never heard of him

[Len Cnut]

never heard of him

He ran a small family Butcher Shop in the Brownsville section of Brooklyn in the early 1980s, he's sort of an American success story, began with a little push trolley selling prime cuts in the park, now he's the proud owner of a franchise. Never seen the advert? 'You can't beat Mikes meat?' ring a bell?

[Ace Nova]

never heard of him

(Iron) Mike Tyson

[LyndaRose]

ow, Mike Tyson, lol, not interested. Never seen an ad here in Holland

[Apollo]

People discount Klitsko because of the current competition level.....but you say that Tyson cant be marked down because of that. Bit of a double standard?

And you seem to only want to rank Tyson based in his prime couple of years. Which is fine....but you cant have a greatest of all time discussion and then just base it on a couple year period.

Tyson is a top 10 all time great. But people tend to overvalue him because he had the potential to be the greatest ever. But to judge a career you cant discount 70% of the career.

During his absolute prime, Tyson had the potential to KO anybody. But ten fights against Ali? Johnson? Is there any doubt who would win the majority of them?

And then lets talk anout the last five years of careers. Once Tyson lost his ability to KO people, wasn't he basically finished? Other all time greats could win by experience, skill and the technical aspect of the sport.

I practically paid for my house betting against Tyson at the end of his career. People would say "but all he has to do is land one punch and it's over." Thank you, I will take that bet at whatever dollar amount you choose. People remember him as this rabid animal that could kill people with one devestating punch.....and that image helped make people think he was better than he actually endes up being.

[Len Cnut]

People discount Klitsko because of the current competition level.....but you say that Tyson cant be marked down because of that. Bit of a double standard?

And you seem to only want to rank Tyson based in his prime couple of years. Which is fine....but you cant have a greatest of all time discussion and then just base it on a couple year period.

Tyson is a top 10 all time great. But people tend to overvalue him because he had the potential to be the greatest ever. But to judge a career you cant discount 70% of the career.

During his absolute prime, Tyson had the potential to KO anybody. But ten fights against Ali? Johnson? Is there any doubt who would win the majority of them?

And then lets talk anout the last five years of careers. Once Tyson lost his ability to KO people, wasn't he basically finished? Other all time greats could win by experience, skill and the technical aspect of the sport.

I practically paid for my house betting against Tyson at the end of his career. People would say "but all he has to do is land one punch and it's over." Thank you, I will take that bet at whatever dollar amount you choose. People remember him as this rabid animal that could kill people with one devestating punch.....and that image helped make people think he was better than he actually endes up being.

I'm the opposite, i lost a shitload of money betting ON Roy Jones towards the end of his career...which isn't over yet, if that makes sense. But yeah, totally agree with you Groghan, except for the Mike would be in the top ten bit. Not cuz I necessarily disagree, I just can't come to a desicion about that shit.

[Iron MikeyJ]

Sorry Lenny, I disagree with most of your post there. You give both Dempsey and Tunney credit, saying nobody had seen fighters with styles like that before, yet you discredit Tyson. My point was, if you put 1988 Mike Tyson in a time machine to go back and fight those guys pre 1920, then YES Mike would mop the floor with the whole lot of em'. Why? Because they would not be prepared for a fighter like him at all. They wouldn't know what to do with him.

You are right about the facts concerning Williard and others before Dempsey. It's hard to get any info on any of those guys, it just doesn't really exist, except for words on a computer or book. So if I made errors, I apologize. My knowledge is a little foggy about that era. But to my knowledge, didn't Johnson intentianally through the Williard fight?

As far as everything else you said, all I can say is agree to disagree. You brought up Lennox Lewis and said "Mike wasn't too old for that fight." Man come on, he was already a shot fighter by that time. I have every tyson fight on dvd, and he is old, fat, and slow when he fought Lewis. He was NOT the same fighter. Now put Tyson from 1988 against Lennox and lets see who wins that fight, which I wouldn't bet on Lennox. I do give you the first Holyfield fight, Evander fought a really smart fight and I give him credit for that one, he won the fight. I don't make excuses for that loss, which I'm not now. But I will say this, he wasn't the same fighter after Rooney was gone. He became a head hunter. Had Rooney been in the picture, Tyson beats Douglas, Tyson beats Holyfield, and the 90's heavyweight division looks a lot different.

Also I gotta say, you put to much weight on records man. You say it is the be all and end all, which to me that just isn't the case. Apollo mentioned the Klitchko brothers (Whom I don't understand his point since he said I take credit from them for not fighting anyone, but I give Tyson a double standard, which I don't understand??? When did I say that?? I never mentioned them at all. The only thing I have against the Klitchko's is I think its BS they won't fight each other and I think their fans are bias about that point. They always say "They afre brothers, blah blah blah." But don't true legends fight the best of the best? So by them refusing to fight each other, I can't consider them anywhere near legend status. IMO it's no differnt than Ali refusing to fight Frazier or Tyson refusing to fight Holyfield, it doesn't matter that they are brothers. Champs fight the best out there, so since they are DUCKING each other, I think thats crap and its killed the division, so I can't wait till they are gone so the division will be exciting again. But I digress....) But anyways, one of the Klitchko's lost to Chris Byrd, so does that mean either Chris Byrd is or was really good, or does that mean that brother is really bad??? But going by the records, that has to be considered. So by your logic, thats a massive knock against that brother (although the brother did beat him) I'm just saying records are not everything, because most figthters have bad losses, you have to look beyond that IMO. But to each their own, I'm just enjoying the conversation, not trying to say I'M RIGHT or anything.

Also when people say Tyson never beat anyone, I say BS. Larry Holmes is a nobody? Michael Spinks beat Holmes twice (controversy aside, by the records Len he beat Holmes) plus he is considered one of the 5 best Lightheavyweights by RING magzine, so he is by no means a bum. Bonecrusher Smith, Tyrel Biggs, Frank Bruno, Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick, Buster Mathis jr, and Donovan Ruddock were all top contenders at the time Tyson beat them. It's not like they were bums, they were all top ten and even top 5 ranked fighters. You can only beat the guys out there. And let me talk about Ruddock, that dude was a bad man. Those two fights him and Tyson had were freaking EPIC. Both of those fighters would have beaten either Holyfield or Bowe at that time, they were two heavy hitting titans. Ruddock went on record of saying the Tyson fights took something out of him, and he was never the same after that, and I can believe it. Had he never of fought Tyson, I believe he beats both Lennox Lewis and Tommy Morrison. He left something in the ring against Tyson, and he never got it back again. Honestly you can say the same about Tyson, Ruddock took something from him also. People that say "Tyson never fought or won any wars", need to go and watch the two Ruddock fights. They were the best WARS Tyson ever fought in and won. Honestly they are two of my favorite fights of all time, just plain entertaining to watch, just fantastic.

[T.wa.T]

Tyson isn't even the top heavy in his generation. That would be Lennox Lewis.

Id put him in the 10~15 group. He always had trouble with bigger fighters, always. From Bonecrusher to Ruddock to Lewis etc....granted those guys should be in a super heavy weight division but they weren't.

He also got KO'd by Holyfield & then lost his mind and bit his ear off. Maybe it was head butts that pissed him off, but you can't do that shit & be thought of as one of the greats.

I do think Mike could handle both Klitchkos with his speed and head movement (the prime Tyson) and I think he could handle alot of the past champs.

He lost all of the bigtime fights he was in. Lewis, Holyfield twice beaten by a 42 ~ 1 underdog etc....

Tyson is my alltime favorite heavyweight but he's not near the GOAT.

[Len Cnut]

Tyson would decapitate the Klitschkos. I really hate having these discussions cuz i actually ADORE Mike Tyson. I think thats why I'm so hard on him, cuz as I said before, he was my generations one and like, to me, his failure is my failure It's indicative of why my Dads generation is better than mine, I'll never forgive Mike for that

[Iron MikeyJ]

Tyson would decapitate the Klitschkos. I really hate having these discussions cuz i actually ADORE Mike Tyson. I think thats why I'm so hard on him, cuz as I said before, he was my generations one and like, to me, his failure is my failure It's indicative of why my Dads generation is better than mine, I'll never forgive Mike for that

Ya I hear ya. I damn near cried when both Holyfield and Lewis beat him.

[Len Cnut]

Sorry Lenny, I disagree with most of your post there. You give both Dempsey and Tunney credit, saying nobody had seen fighters with styles like that before, yet you discredit Tyson. My point was, if you put 1988 Mike Tyson in a time machine to go back and fight those guys pre 1920, then YES Mike would mop the floor with the whole lot of em'. Why? Because they would not be prepared for a fighter like him at all. They wouldn't know what to do with him.

Which is the whole reason why the notion is stupid and the way you judge a fighter is based on what they did in their time and how that makes them comparitively better, when you get into time machine territory it's kinda ridiculous.

You are right about the facts concerning Williard and others before Dempsey. It's hard to get any info on any of those guys, it just doesn't really exist, except for words on a computer or book. So if I made errors, I apologize. My knowledge is a little foggy about that era. But to my knowledge, didn't Johnson intentianally through the Williard fight?

It's been said yeah but who knows.

As far as everything else you said, all I can say is agree to disagree. You brought up Lennox Lewis and said "Mike wasn't too old for that fight." Man come on, he was already a shot fighter by that time. I have every tyson fight on dvd, and he is old, fat, and slow when he fought Lewis. He was NOT the same fighter. Now put Tyson from 1988 against Lennox and lets see who wins that fight, which I wouldn't bet on Lennox. I do give you the first Holyfield fight, Evander fought a really smart fight and I give him credit for that one, he won the fight. I don't make excuses for that loss, which I'm not now. But I will say this, he wasn't the same fighter after Rooney was gone. He became a head hunter. Had Rooney been in the picture, Tyson beats Douglas, Tyson beats Holyfield, and the 90's heavyweight division looks a lot different.

I agree but how old was Lewis? You ain't shot if you don't train and put work in and can't be bothered, thats called being a cunt, shot is when you physically can't do it anymore. Taking cocaine and shit before fights isn't be shot, it's being a mental bastard. I agree about if Rooney had stayed and Tysons head been right he'd do all those fighters but we're not talking about hypothetical cartoon land, we're talking about what actually happened.

Also I gotta say, you put to much weight on records man. You say it is the be all and end all, which to me that just isn't the case. Apollo mentioned the Klitchko brothers (Whom I don't understand his point since he said I take credit from them for not fighting anyone, but I give Tyson a double standard, which I don't understand??? When did I say that?? I never mentioned them at all. The only thing I have against the Klitchko's is I think its BS they won't fight each other and I think their fans are bias about that point. They always say "They afre brothers, blah blah blah." But don't true legends fight the best of the best? So by them refusing to fight each other, I can't consider them anywhere near legend status. IMO it's no differnt than Ali refusing to fight Frazier or Tyson refusing to fight Holyfield, it doesn't matter that they are brothers. Champs fight the best out there, so since they are DUCKING each other, I think thats crap and its killed the division, so I can't wait till they are gone so the division will be exciting again. But I digress....) But anyways, one of the Klitchko's lost to Chris Byrd, so does that mean either Chris Byrd is or was really good, or does that mean that brother is really bad??? But going by the records, that has to be considered. So by your logic, thats a massive knock against that brother (although the brother did beat him) I'm just saying records are not everything, because most figthters have bad losses, you have to look beyond that IMO. But to each their own, I'm just enjoying the conversation, not trying to say I'M RIGHT or anything.

Look, Chris Byrd would get his arse handed to him in a basket by red riding hood in most heavyweight eras, we both know that, the fact that he beat a Klitschko, well, you just can't look beyond that. What that means is that the Klitschkos ain't all that...and thats my belief, never have thought they were. I won't discredit what they've done cuz end of the day they're top of the tree and they sure as shit didn't get there for free but suffice to say i don't really consider them like, all time greats in the same way i don't with Calzaghe or Mayweather.

Also when people say Tyson never beat anyone, I say BS. Larry Holmes is a nobody? Michael Spinks beat Holmes twice (controversy aside, by the records Len he beat Holmes) plus he is considered one of the 5 best Lightheavyweights by RING magzine, so he is by no means a bum. Bonecrusher Smith, Tyrel Biggs, Frank Bruno, Tony Tubbs, Trevor Berbick, Buster Mathis jr, and Donovan Ruddock were all top contenders at the time Tyson beat them. It's not like they were bums, they were all top ten and even top 5 ranked fighters. You can only beat the guys out there. And let me talk about Ruddock, that dude was a bad man. Those two fights him and Tyson had were freaking EPIC. Both of those fighters would have beaten either Holyfield or Bowe at that time, they were two heavy hitting titans. Ruddock went on record of saying the Tyson fights took something out of him, and he was never the same after that, and I can believe it. Had he never of fought Tyson, I believe he beats both Lennox Lewis and Tommy Morrison. He left something in the ring against Tyson, and he never got it back again. Honestly you can say the same about Tyson, Ruddock took something from him also. People that say "Tyson never fought or won any wars", need to go and watch the two Ruddock fights. They were the best WARS Tyson ever fought in and won. Honestly they are two of my favorite fights of all time, just plain entertaining to watch, just fantastic.

I never said Tyson didn't beat anybody...in fact Tyson beat most everybody. EXCEPT Holyfield, Lewis, Bowe. Who oddly enough, were the best of his generation. Now i ain't saying he ducked cuz Iron Mike ducks no man, i ain't saying he couldn't in his prime...I'm saying he didn't.

You say i put too much stock in records but look, here's how i see it, when you are working out someone as a great, a bit of EVERYTHING matters. Tyson beat Holmes yes but this is 38 year Holmes here. Back when age was a different thing.

I actually have a theory about that age shit, nowadays a lot of athletes go on longer cuz of better nutrition regimes, better training methods etc etc, you even see it in football now, people like B Hop, Money May, they ain't no freak accidents, these boys SERIOUSLY look after themselves, they live like monks in terms of their health/diet etc Back in the Ali/Holmes mid 30s and you were fucked. But quite frankly i think Mike would've flattened him in his prime too

[DieselDaisy]

The lower reaches of a top 10, I would say.

[Len Cnut]

Tyson would decapitate the Klitschkos. I really hate having these discussions cuz i actually ADORE Mike Tyson. I think thats why I'm so hard on him, cuz as I said before, he was my generations one and like, to me, his failure is my failure It's indicative of why my Dads generation is better than mine, I'll never forgive Mike for that

Ya I hear ya. I damn near cried when both Holyfield and Lewis beat him.

You know what, same here. I really really did. And Buster Douglas i did actually cry (gimme a break, i was 8 years old ) Mike Tyson was/is and always will be one of my all time heroes, i used to get my haircut like him as a kid, one of my earliest baby pictures is me as a toddler with boxing gloves on tryna look like Mike, in that age i was born and grew in Mike was everything.

I remember him coming out of jail and nearly leaping through the ceiling in joy. I bought every newspaper the week before and day after his fights, boxing monthly, ring magazine (well, stole em from the news agents, same difference ) and just plastered my walls with pictures of that bastard. Call me a massive massive massive bitch if you like but part of my heart died when that fuckin' guy lost to Lennox Lewis. LENNOX LEWIS, Lennox the donkey, Lennox who Oliver McCall splattered with his eyes closed. Mike should not have gone out like that. He just was eating punches and...ugh, made my heart sink. I never watched that fight since i saw it that time live and i don't want to ever again.

And i don't even wanna talk about Danny fuckin' Williams. See, i've annoyed myself now, i gotta go listen to some happy music or something

The Douglas one, shit, i can even remember the commentators words 'this has been a courageous perform...Oh what an uppercut! What an uppercut and Tyson goes down! and then he's on his knees and he's putting that gumsheild kinda cockeyed in his mouth and it's like ARGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! Fuck that night.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Lennie Godber

[Iron MikeyJ]

@Lenny,

Back to our previous discussion. You said your talking about "What actually did happen, not make believe cartoon land." First let me say, lol. Yes I admit that when it comes to Mike I'd rather spend my thoughts on ifs and buts, as opposed to what actually went down. Because as we both agree, he had the potential and he had the talent. Did he flush it all down the drain? Yes for sure. But to be fair, if I had the world by the balls at 20, I'm not sure I would have been alright either. Had Cus been 10 years younger, or not have died.... So many possibilities are there where Mike gets remembered a lot differently IMO. Thats why the ifs and buts count to me. The way it all went down was, kind of the shit end of the stick for us boxing fans. It's also the biggest reason why boxing is dying IMO. Had Mike actually lived up to his potential, millions of kids would have went to boxing gyms, which in turn would have kept the sport fresh and interesting. I firmly believe boxing has been on decline because nobody has steped up and filled the hole that Tyson left. Boxing has always had that guy, and he has always been the Haevyeweight Champion. As that division goes, so does boxing....

Edited December 16, 2014 by Iron MikeyJ

[Len Cnut]

That last bit is a lot to lay at Mikes door but honestly? I agree with you. I mean there's still a lot there, I'll always love boxing, it'll never be just a heavyweight thing for me but on the broader scale I'd be a fool to deny what you are saying. And i agree with your position about the Klitschkos and how they should just retire and make way...same with Pacman and Mayweather really.

I still think the Klitschkos might get flattened before the big retirement. This sounds ridiculous but my heart doesn't want them to take Joe Louises record. I love and adore Joe Louis, i think he was an exceptional man and it'd be a damn shame to see his record replaced by those guys dropping stiffs.

[bran]

the mike tyson from punchout is the GOAT.

as for the real boxer he fought a bunch of scrubs.