Heavyweight Boxing

walshb

The Nal wrote: »

He was knocked down by Sonny banks and go up and won. He had ointment rubbed in his eyes vs Liston and was blind for a round and a half and still KO'd him. He got dropped by Henry Cooper and got up and won in the next round. He was by his own admission out of it 3 or 4 times in Zaire and KO'd Foreman. He was completely exhausted in Manilla and still threw a crazy amount of punches in round 14 and won the fight. He avenged defeats to Frazier, Norton and Spinks.

Tyson did none of those things.

They are valid points

But analyse the fights.....

He was beating all of the names you mentioned in the wins. So he had some sticky moments? Big deal. Ali had the heart of a lion and real mental strength.

Regardless, not sure what it has to do with the blanket claim that Tyson had no mental game...

Tyson lost twice to Evander. He tried to avenge the defeat and lost. He could not avenge Buster Douglas due to circumstances.

This is just his career. It differs to Ali's.......

You can pick holes in anyone's career. Like I could easily say that a Cooper or Banks would not last 2 rds with a prime Tyson.....

Leon Spinks would last one rd tops with a prime Tyson, yet he beat Ali? See, picking holes here and there works many ways.

He did avenge an amateur loss to Tillman.....yes, not exactly the same, but still avenged.

There were moments in Mike's career where he showed what could be seen as a lack of mental strength. No issue with that.....

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Ali most famous fight was a come from behind victory ,

Zaire?

The one where he was ahead on all cards at KO time?

Manila .
He had a few wars where he was hurt, Tyson never won a fight after being hurt ,

yourdeadwright

The Nal wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

Ali not the same here? I can't recall where Ali was being properly beaten, or beaten up and turned it around.

He was knocked down by Sonny banks and go up and won. He had ointment rubbed in his eyes vs Liston and was blind for a round and a half and still KO'd him. He got dropped by Henry Cooper and got up and won in the next round. He was by his own admission out of it 3 or 4 times in Zaire and KO'd Foreman. He was completely exhausted in Manilla and still threw a crazy amount of punches in round 14 and won the fight. He avenged defeats to Frazier, Norton and Spinks.  

Tyson did none of those things.

Exactly the above
I was talking about Manilla .,Ali fought through numerous hard spots to win ,

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

The Nal wrote: »

He was knocked down by Sonny banks and go up and won. He had ointment rubbed in his eyes vs Liston and was blind for a round and a half and still KO'd him. He got dropped by Henry Cooper and got up and won in the next round. He was by his own admission out of it 3 or 4 times in Zaire and KO'd Foreman. He was completely exhausted in Manilla and still threw a crazy amount of punches in round 14 and won the fight. He avenged defeats to Frazier, Norton and Spinks.  

Tyson did none of those things.

They are valid points

But analyse the fights.....

He was beating all of the names you mentioned in the wins. So he had some sticky moments? Big deal. Ali had the heart of a lion and real mental strength.

Regardless, not sure what it has to do with the blanket claim that Tyson had no mental game...

Tyson lost twice to Evander. He tried to avenge the defeat and lost. He could not avenge Buster Douglas due to circumstances.

This is just his career. It differs to Ali's.......

You can pick holes in anyone's career. Like I could easily say that a Cooper or Banks would not last 2 rds with a prime Tyson.....

Leon Spinks would last one rd tops with a prime Tyson, yet he beat Ali? See, picking holes here and there works many ways.

He did avenge an amateur loss to Tillman.....yes, not exactly the same, but still avenged.

There were moments in Mike's career where he showed what could be seen as a lack of mental strength. No issue with that.....

I'm more pointing at he never had a bad patch in a fight and came back from it in that fight,
Tyson was a bully he destroyed you or you won, there was no close fights that he won ,

The Nal

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I'm more pointing at he never had a bad patch in a fight and came back from it in that fight,
Tyson was a bully he destroyed you or you won, there was no close fights that he won ,

Which is a real shame really. If he didn't drop Kevin Rooney as his trainer he may never have been beaten. Who knows? He showed that much potential early on.

Thats Don King for you.

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Manila .
He had a few wars where he was hurt, Tyson never won a fight after being hurt ,

Was that a come from behind victory? If I recall Ali was ahead early and Frazier came back, but never went ahead on the cards......

Mike had some tough moments in fights and still won them

Ruddock 1 springs to mind...

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Manila .
He had a few wars where he was hurt, Tyson never won a fight after being hurt ,

Was that a come from behind victory? If I recall Ali was ahead early and Frazier came back, but never went ahead on the cards......

Mike had some tough moments in fights and still won them

Ruddock 1 springs to mind...

Not 100% on the cards I think was slightly Ali was getting beat up bad until he again swung it in his own favour,
Just cause he was up on the card doesn't mean much , he was starting to take a real beating till he turned it around, He was quoted as saying it was the closest he came to dying , and he wanted to give up but just didn't

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not 100% on the cards I think was slightly Ali was getting beat up bad until he again swung it in his own favour,
Just cause he was up on the card doesn't mean much , he was starting to take a real beating till he turned it around, He was quoted as saying it was the closest he came to dying , and he wanted to give up but just didn't

I have seen the fight several times. He was ahead and clearly so.....

Frazier had his moments....

Anyway, I won't diss Mike because he happened to dispatch his foes and beat them very very convincingly during his peak years.

He lost one fight during his peak. That was against Buster, where he showed tons of heart and mental strength to stick in there and keep fighting.

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Not 100% on the cards I think was slightly Ali was getting beat up bad until he again swung it in his own favour,
Just cause he was up on the card doesn't mean much , he was starting to take a real beating till he turned it around, He was quoted as saying it was the closest he came to dying , and he wanted to give up but just didn't

I have seen the fight several times. He was ahead and clearly so.....

Frazier had his moments....

Anyway, I won't diss Mike because he happened to dispatch his foes and beat them very very convincingly during his peak years.

He lost one fight during his peak. That was against Buster, where he showed tons of heart and mental strength to stick in there and keep fighting.

Being ahead has nothing to do with the conversation , We where speaking about him fighting through a tuff situation that  fight alone was worse than anything mike came through ,

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Being ahead has nothing to do with the conversation , We where speaking about him fighting through a tuff situation that  fight alone was worse than anything mike came through ,

So he didn't have to come through as many tough hard fights to get wins as Ali....

Big deal. All credit to him......

This all goes back to you saying he had no mental strength.....

That is not true. He had plenty of it. Just not as easily seen as it is for some others.

His bad marks against him causing this obscurity.

Loads more greats had similar ring and outside ring issues; but Tyson always seems to get more criticism levied at him for these lapses....

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Being ahead has nothing to do with the conversation , We where speaking about him fighting through a tuff situation that  fight alone was worse than anything mike came through ,

So he didn't have to come through as many tough hard fights to get wins as Ali....

Big deal. All credit to him......

This all goes back to you saying he had no mental strength.....

That is not true. He had plenty of it. Just not as easily seen as it is for some others.

His could bad marks against him causing this obscurity.

Loads more greats had similar ring and outside ring issues; but Tyson always seems to get more criticism levied at him for these lapses....

Just opinions but I think Mike is overrated by many,
Out of interest who do you think Mike biggest win was against ?

Littlehorny

Another boxing thread ruined by a poxy Mike Tyson discussion. "Prime Tyson", "peak Tyson" - absolute scutter, I roll my eyes as soon as these qoutes start coming out.
He beat some good fighters and looked magic at times but a great fighter is defined because he beat other great fighters, fact is he met two other great fighters in his career and lost- end of.
Oh yeah, the two greats who he came up short against are both older than him!

Too Tough To Die

Bruce Lee vs Mike Tyson.

Who wins, and how?

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Just opinions but I think Mike is overrated by many,
Out of interest who do you think Mike biggest win was against ?

Biggest win was probably against Spinks due to Spinks being considered the lineal champion.

Best win? Hard to say. He beat all the top contenders in that 4 year period before Douglas, and then his imprisonment...

walshb

Littlehorny wrote: »

Another boxing thread ruined by a poxy Mike Tyson discussion. "Prime Tyson", "peak Tyson" - absolute scutter, I roll my eyes as soon as these qoutes start coming out.
He beat some good fighters and looked magic at times but a great fighter is defined because he beat other great fighters, fact is he met two other great fighters in his career and lost- end of.
Oh yeah, the two greats who he came up short against are both older than him!

Holmes and Spinks are both considered great fighters...

Tyson smashed both...

But wait for the excuses...Spinks was too small and Holmes too old?

walshb

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

Bruce Lee vs Mike Tyson.

Who wins, and how?

Boxing...I’ll go with Tyson KO within 20 seconds...

MMA: Tyson KO within 30 seconds...

How? Fists!

Littlehorny

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

Bruce Lee vs Mike Tyson.

Who wins, and how?

Now are we talking prime Bruce lee or peak Bruce Lee?

normanoffside

Littlehorny wrote: »

Now are we talking prime Bruce lee or peak Bruce Lee?

At least Bruce’s peak lasted longer than a year. 😂😂

mada82

I have a box set of Tyson’s fights and I remember thinking he was a little over rated when I had finished them.
Hugely exciting to watch and had an incredible aura but I just feel an elite super heavy will nearly always beat him.
I agree he was finished post prison. No where near the same fighter at that stage.

The Nal

walshb wrote: »

Holmes and Spinks are both considered great fighters...

Tyson smashed both...

But wait for the excuses...Spinks was too small and Holmes too old?

Spinks was a decent scalp yep. Destroyed him. Thats as good as it got. Thats the peak.

Holmes was 38! So yeah, old. Retired a couple of years by then too. And he has lost his last two fights to Spinks. He was done.

No one is saying Tyson wasn't sensational, just overrated in general.

Too Tough To Die wrote: »

Bruce Lee vs Mike Tyson.

Who wins, and how?

Tyson wins when Lee taps out to ear bites when Tyson realises he can't win by boxing.

The first time in combat sports anyone has tapped out due to ear bites.

walshb

The Nal wrote: »

Spinks was a decent scalp yep. Destroyed him. Thats as good as it got. Thats the peak.

Holmes was 38! So yeah, old. Retired a couple of years by then too. And he has lost his last two fights to Spinks. He was done.

No one is saying Tyson wasn't sensational, just overrated in general.

But this is where there should be discussion. You need to compare him to others....

I'll start: Holyfield. Great fighter....

Who did he beat that was great? He beat Mike, Foreman and Bowe and Holmes

But dig deeper and you have Holmes being even older than when Mike obliterated him

Beat Bowe 1/3 times. Lost the other two, one by KO. And it is widely known that Bowe ate himself and lacked training for the 2nd bout..

Beat Foreman....who was 41 or so.......

Beat Mike......yes, but neither man was at their peak......

Lennox Lewis.....what great fighters did he beat? Holyfield and Tyson....

Dig deeper, and Holyfield, like Michael Spinks was not a big HW, and with Holyfield he was also clearly past his best days....

Lewis then beat Mike......let's be real....Tyson was a shell of his former self in 2002.....

He also got clean knocked out by two less than great fighters in McCall and Rahman....avenged both, which is class.

I could go through more.....

My whole debateand points are more to do with applying fair assessment and logic to all. I think Mike gets judged and assessed more harshly.

The Nal

walshb wrote: »

But this is where there should be discussion. You need to compare him to others....

I'll start: Holyfield. Great fighter....

Who did he beat that was great? He beat Mike, Foreman and Bowe and Holmes

But dig deeper and you have Holmes being even older than when Mike obliterated him

Beat Bowe 1/3 times. Lost the other two, one by KO. And it is widely known that Bowe ate himself and lacked training for the 2nd bout..

Beat Foreman....who was 41 or so.......

Beat Mike......yes, but neither man was at their peak......

Lennox Lewis.....what great fighters did he beat? Holyfield and Tyson....

Dig deeper, and Holyfield, like Michael Spinks was not a big HW, and with Holyfield he was also clearly past his best days....

Lewis then beat Mike......let's be real....Tyson was a shell of his former self in 2002.....

He also got clean knocked out by two less than great fighters in McCall and Rahman....avenged both, which is class.

I could go through more.....

My whole debateand points are more to do with applying fair assessment and logic to all. I think Mike gets judged and assessed more harshly.

Dunno.

Holyfield KO'd Douglas with ease, who had just KO'd Tyson. He stopped Tyson aswell obviously. Which is why Id have him ahead of Tyson in the all time list.

Same for Lewis. Who had an unusual career, granted. A late dash for greatness. Rahman, Tyson and Vitali in his last 3 fights. Beat all the same people Tyson did and more.

Being passed it at 30 isn't really any excuse. If thats the case Wilder is well past it, as is Fury, AJ has a year left and Conor McGregor is over the hill.

There are certain criteria for a boxer to be considered as a true great and Mike didn't pass the test on any of them. I don't think thats unfair or harsh and I wish I could say the opposite but I just can't. I've no agenda here either. Football aside, hes probably the sportsman I've watched the most. Both live and old fights, docs etc.

On a side note, with all the MeToo stuff, I do find it amazing that a convicted rapist is so loved globally. Appearing on Ellen and the like. Weird one.

yourdeadwright

Mike to me was the most exciting heavy weight to ever enter the ring,
But for me he isn't an all time great ,

walshb

The Nal wrote: »

Dunno.

Holyfield KO'd Douglas with ease, who had just KO'd Tyson. He stopped Tyson aswell obviously. Which is why Id have him ahead of Tyson in the all time list.

Same for Lewis. Who had an unusual career, granted. A late dash for greatness. Rahman, Tyson and Vitali in his last 3 fights. Beat all the same people Tyson did and more.

Being passed it at 30 isn't really any excuse. If thats the case Wilder is well past it, as is Fury, AJ has a year left and Conor McGregor is over the hill.

There are certain criteria for a boxer to be considered as a true great and Mike didn't pass the test on any of them. I don't think thats unfair or harsh and I wish I could say the opposite but I just can't. I've no agenda here either. Football aside, hes probably the sportsman I've watched the most. Both live and old fights, docs etc.

On a side note, with all the MeToo stuff, I do find it amazing that a convicted rapist is so loved globally. Appearing on Ellen and the like. Weird one.

You just using a number for age/being past it does not tell the full story....

Tyson was past it at 30. Clearly so. That's just his life and career. It happens. He had his best days pre prison.

He had circa 15 championship fights at HW and won the majority of them. He is a HOF fighter. A great fighter. The greatest? No.....but to not label him great is a disservice. At HW he achieved a huge amount. A lot more than many before and after him

I think you placed Gene Tunney ahead of Mike at HW.....sorry, but that is absolute ridiculous. He's not remotely close to Tyson in terms of HW achievements or as being in any way a threat in a fantasy scenario.

Maybe you don't have an agenda. But some of the criticisms you have levied at Tyson and some of the points made seem a bit too harsh and unrealistic.

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

The Nal wrote: »

Dunno.

Holyfield KO'd Douglas with ease, who had just KO'd Tyson. He stopped Tyson aswell obviously. Which is why Id have him ahead of Tyson in the all time list.

Same for Lewis. Who had an unusual career, granted. A late dash for greatness. Rahman, Tyson and Vitali in his last 3 fights. Beat all the same people Tyson did and more.

Being passed it at 30 isn't really any excuse. If thats the case Wilder is well past it, as is Fury, AJ has a year left and Conor McGregor is over the hill.

There are certain criteria for a boxer to be considered as a true great and Mike didn't pass the test on any of them. I don't think thats unfair or harsh and I wish I could say the opposite but I just can't. I've no agenda here either. Football aside, hes probably the sportsman I've watched the most. Both live and old fights, docs etc.  

On a side note, with all the MeToo stuff, I do find it amazing that a convicted rapist is so loved globally. Appearing on Ellen and the like. Weird one.

You just using a number for age/being past it does not tell the full story....

Tyson was past it at 30. Clearly so. That's just his life and career. It happens. He had his best days pre prison.

He had circa 15 championship fights at HW and won the majority of them. He is a HOF fighter. A great fighter. The greatest? No.....but to not label him great is a disservice. At HW he achieved a huge amount. A lot more than many before and after him

I think you placed Gene Tunney ahead of Mike at HW.....sorry, but that is absolute ridiculous. He's not remotely close to Tyson in terms of HW achievements or as being in any way a threat in a fantasy scenario.

Maybe you don't have an agenda. But some of the criticisms you have levied at Tyson and some of the points made seem a bit too harsh and unrealistic.

Very hard to critic achievements of guys so so far apart in time but in a fantasy match up Tyson would literally murder Tunney ,
Tunney wouldn't have seen anything like Mikes power, speed or athletic ability ,

walshb

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Very hard to critic achievements of guys so so far apart in time but in a fantasy match up Tyson would literally murder Tunney ,
Tunney wouldn't have seen anything like Mikes power, speed or athletic ability ,

Separate note to Tyson, but you'd be amazed at some people who would pick the likes of Louis and Tunney and Dempsey over the likes of Tyson/Lewis/Bowe etc....

The Nal

walshb wrote: »

You just using a number for age/being past it does not tell the full story....

Tyson was past it at 30. Clearly so. That's just his life and career. It happens. He had his best days pre prison.

He had circa 15 championship fights at HW and won the majority of them. He is a HOF fighter. A great fighter. The greatest? No.....but to not label him great is a disservice. At HW he achieved a huge amount. A lot more than many before and after him

I think you placed Gene Tunney ahead of Mike at HW.....sorry, but that is absolute ridiculous. He's not remotely close to Tyson in terms of HW achievements or as being in any way a threat in a fantasy scenario.

Maybe you don't have an agenda. But some of the criticisms you have levied at Tyson and some of the points made seem a bit too harsh and unrealistic.

I dont think I had Tunney ahead of him. Just outside the top ten along with Mike maybe but Tunney ahead of Tyson isn't an uncommon opinion. Tunney finished his career at 88-1, knocked down only once in 90 fights, never knocked out, beat the man (Dempsey) twice and avenged his only defeat. A lot at light heavyweight though granted.

If we don't judge true greatness on these basics of the sport though, Im talking top end - who they beat, winning from the floor, winning from behind, longevity, consistency etc, what do we base it on?! What other criteria is there? I don't see how its being unfair or harsh. Merely judging him on his record.

Sure, Tyson could have beaten Holyfield, Lewis et al in his short prime. Probably would have in 1988. But he didn't.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Very hard to critic achievements of guys so so far apart in time but in a fantasy match up Tyson would literally murder Tunney ,
Tunney wouldn't have seen anything like Mikes power, speed or athletic ability ,

Tyson would've put him in hospital in 20 seconds yeah. Tyson would've probably put Liston down in a round. Liston was soft and slow in comparison. The fantasy thing doesn't really come into it for me when judging places in history.

walshb wrote: »

Separate note to Tyson, but you'd be amazed at some people who would pick the likes of Louis and Tunney and Dempsey over the likes of Tyson/Lewis/Bowe etc....

In a fantasy match tpe thing? ie prime Louis could beat prime Tyson?

walshb

The Nal wrote: »

In a fantasy match tpe thing? ie prime Louis could beat prime Tyson?

Yes. There is a thread here on that match..

I think Mike takes Louis out in max 2 rds. Horrible style for Louis, who was there to be hit, and who could be hurt, and was hurt and dropped by far less dangerous men.

yourdeadwright

The Nal wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

You just using a number for age/being past it does not tell the full story....

Tyson was past it at 30. Clearly so. That's just his life and career. It happens. He had his best days pre prison.

He had circa 15 championship fights at HW and won the majority of them. He is a HOF fighter. A great fighter. The greatest? No.....but to not label him great is a disservice. At HW he achieved a huge amount. A lot more than many before and after him

I think you placed Gene Tunney ahead of Mike at HW.....sorry, but that is absolute ridiculous. He's not remotely close to Tyson in terms of HW achievements or as being in any way a threat in a fantasy scenario.

Maybe you don't have an agenda. But some of the criticisms you have levied at Tyson and some of the points made seem a bit too harsh and unrealistic.

I dont think I had Tunney ahead of him. Just outside the top ten along with Mike maybe but Tunney ahead of Tyson isn't an uncommon opinion. Tunney finished his career at 88-1, knocked down only once in 90 fights, never knocked out, beat the man (Dempsey) twice and avenged his only defeat. A lot at light heavyweight though granted.

If we don't judge true greatness on these basics of the sport though, Im talking top end - who they beat, winning from the floor, winning from behind, longevity, consistency etc, what do we base it on?! What other criteria is there? I don't see how its being unfair or harsh. Merely judging him on his record.

Sure, Tyson could have beaten Holyfield, Lewis et al in his short prime. Probably would have in 1988. But he didn't.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Very hard to critic achievements of guys so so far apart in time but in a fantasy match up Tyson would literally murder Tunney ,
Tunney wouldn't have seen anything like Mikes power, speed or athletic ability ,

Tyson would've put him in hospital in 20 seconds yeah. Tyson would've probably put Liston down in a round. Liston was soft and slow in comparison. The fantasy thing doesn't really come into it for me when judging places in history.

walshb wrote: »

Separate note to Tyson, but you'd be amazed at some people who would pick the likes of Louis and Tunney and Dempsey over the likes of Tyson/Lewis/Bowe etc....

In a fantasy match tpe thing? ie prime Louis could beat prime Tyson?

I agree with not using Fantasy in places in history as you could only fight in your own time, and didn't have the advanced training other did years later, Plus a lot of the guys later took traits and learnt lessons from these guys who came before them ,

walshb

I too would not lend all the weight to fantasy matches, but at HW, Tunney for me is not comparable at all to Tyson. Tunney did very little at HW to be close to Tyson.