Prime Tyson overrated.

treelo said:
now you need to fuck off, this is the problem with people on a karate forum, they see the likes of Jon Jones fighting a 10-5 MMA fighter and think he is fighting "the best in the world"

Michael Spinks, Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, Frank Bruno, Donovan Ruddock are not fucking scrubs you absolute ignorant dick
Click to expand...
I watched most of Mike's entire career champ. I'm well aware of all of his opponents and who they were.

I'm not faulting him for the comp, this is one case where it's all that was available. But it is one of the weakest spans in HW history for sure, and unfortunately when he did match up with some real well known talent he was mentally and spiritually broken to properly compete.

I'm a big fan of Tyson as a boxer but also put him in perspective. He's one of the great "what if?" stories of all-time, which is truly saying something when you still have that guy at say the #12 spot all-time.
 
Natural Order said:
I watched most of Mike's entire career champ. I'm well aware of all of his opponents and who they were.

I'm not faulting him for the comp, this is one case where it's all that was available. But it is one of the weakest spans in HW history for sure, and unfortunately when he did match up with some real well known talent he was mentally and spiritually broken to properly compete.

I'm a big fan of Tyson as a boxer but also put him in perspective. He's one of the great "what if?" stories of all-time, which is truly saying something when you still have that guy at say the #12 spot all-time.
Click to expand...
and yet you call them scrubs

i'm not even a big Tyson fan, but i would like to know the comparison to say the 90's in terms of opponents

there were maybe 2 very very fighters who came along just after Tyson, the stars just didnt align at the time
 
treelo said:
and yet you call them scrubs

i'm not even a big Tyson fan, but i would like to know the comparison to say the 90's in terms of opponents

there were maybe 2 very very fighters who came along just after Tyson, the stars just didnt align at the time
Click to expand...
Scrubs is harsh, I'll admit.

Can we settle on B-league?

If Cus had lived till 1990 we'd be having an entirely different conversation about this guy I think. As it stands, he's still one of the best HWs of all-time. Dude was an absolute unit in almost every metric by the time he was 22. If you ask me who I'm taking in their prime to represent me as a fighter (they lose, I die type shit) you better believe prime Iron Mike is on the fucking short list.
 
The other thing I'll say in Mike's defense is that the 80's had the terrible task of meeting the absurd expectations fans had come to have from the 70's. That's a fucking tough act to follow for sure.
 
treelo said:
you are making sound like he is butterbean, c'mon man, he beat some very good fighters
Click to expand...
Nah, don't get me wrong. I think prime Tyson could beat anyone. I'm very much in his corner in recognizing just how crazy good he was. Just acknowledging that he did come up in a weak HW division, and some other issues, which is usually what dogs him when it comes to GOAT talk.

Personally, I very much believe he would turn any era into meat. Dude was a destroyer.
 
For someone who had such a short prime, he's having a pretty long span of discussion. It's 2025 and people are still talking about him.

I don't see people talking as much about the short prime of Frazier (1969-1973) or Foreman (1973-1977).
 
defjaam said:
For someone who had such a short prime, he's having a pretty long span of discussion. It's 2025 and people are still talking about him.

I don't see people talking as much about the short prime of Frazier (1969-1973) or Foreman (1973-1977).
Click to expand...
People talk about Mike Tyson for a LOT of reasons outside of what he did in the 80s though. That doesn't really have much to do with how good he was.
 
Doctor Grudge said:
People talk about Mike Tyson for a LOT of reasons outside of what he did in the 80s though. That doesn't really have much to do with how good he was.
Click to expand...
The good, the bad and the ugly.
Becoming the youngest heavyweight champion in history in 1986, biting Holyfield in 1997.
Beating Mitch Green in a sanctioned boxing match, street fight with Green two years later.
Chasing Lennox Lewis out of the ring in a sparring in 1984, getting beaten to a pulp by Lennox 18 years later.
 
Natural Order said:
Without a doubt the most insane potential ever shown at HW......but generally all for naught. Wowed the world by eviscerating scrubs.....but unfortunately never shone in the big moments when it came time to fight the upper echelon. I believe he put on a bit too much muscle mass which hindered that early speed and timing he had.

I have him somewhere in the 10-15 range of a HW goat list.
Click to expand...
jesus how fucking clueless do you have to be to claim mike's potential was for naught and he fought nothing but scrubs?!

the youngest man to hold the HW championship (to this day!), and the first to unify them all in the 3 belt era, all while becoming a global icon. the men he whooped were literally the best there was at the time, and even the argument that the division was thin at the time is stupid. he faced quality opposition.
 
randomg1t said:
jesus how fucking clueless do you have to be to claim mike's potential was for naught and he fought nothing but scrubs?!

the youngest man to hold the HW championship (to this day!), and the first to unify them all in the 3 belt era, all while becoming a global icon. the men he whooped were literally the best there was at the time, and even the argument that the division was thin at the time is stupid. he faced quality opposition.
Click to expand...

Who was his best quality oppositions during that time?
 
Takes Two To Tango said:
Who was his best quality oppositions during that time?
Click to expand...
michael spinks was a legitimately great boxer. frank bruno was good, as was tony tucker.

the fact that mike ran through good guys and made them look like shit does not mean they were never any good. he was taking out champions and defending against #1 contenders, and he was still an 8 to 1 favorite against them. people look at that and think everyone must've sucked, instead of realizing that mike was a fucking wrecking ball.
 
randomg1t said:
jesus how fucking clueless do you have to be to claim mike's potential was for naught and he fought nothing but scrubs?!

the youngest man to hold the HW championship (to this day!), and the first to unify them all in the 3 belt era, all while becoming a global icon. the men he whooped were literally the best there was at the time, and even the argument that the division was thin at the time is stupid. he faced quality opposition.
Click to expand...
It could have been so much more is the point.

He’s most famously remembered for getting starched by Buster and biting another man’s ear off.
 
Natural Order said:
It could have been so much more is the point.
Click to expand...
ok, who was he supposed to fight during his rise and conquer of the HW division that he didn't?
Natural Order said:
He’s most famously remembered for getting starched by Buster and biting another man’s ear off.
Click to expand...
to people who don't watch boxing, yeah. my mother knows him for biting holyfield. she isn't exactly what i'd use to measure someone's career.
 
randomg1t said:
ok, who was he supposed to fight during his rise and conquer of the HW division that he didn't?

to people who don't watch boxing, yeah. my mother knows him for biting holyfield. she isn't exactly what i'd use to measure someone's career.
Click to expand...
Youre overly sensitive clearly. As stated I watched most of his career. He could have been so much more.

Remember that he lost to the biggest names he fought, that happened.
 
Natural Order said:
You obviously didnt read my previous posts.
Click to expand...
i don't think i need to read all of your previous posts to ask you who is missing from his resume for him to be "so much more"?

it's your claim, amigo, not mine. surely you can expand on it a little less vaguely?
 
randomg1t said:
michael spinks was a legitimately great boxer. frank bruno was good, as was tony tucker.

the fact that mike ran through good guys and made them look like shit does not mean they were never any good. he was taking out champions and defending against #1 contenders, and he was still an 8 to 1 favorite against them. people look at that and think everyone must've sucked, instead of realizing that mike was a fucking wrecking ball.
Click to expand...
I dont think anyone is seriously saying Michael Spinks was not a great boxer. But I wouldn't think it was that big of a deal if Usyk beat Bivol. Spinks isn't a natural heavyweight, he is fighting at a handicap.
 
randomg1t said:
i don't think i need to read all of your previous posts to ask you who is missing from his resume for him to be "so much more"?

it's your claim, amigo, not mine. surely you can expand on it a little less vaguely?
Click to expand...
I didnt say anybody missing. He boxed in one of worst eras for HWs, as noted by most boxing pundits. He beat some reasonably good boxers for sure, but at the end of the day couldnt best the upper echelon.

There’s nothing vague about any of this. This is
old news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,623
Messages
58,306,281
Members
176,000
Latest member
Furigo94

Share this page

Back
Top