Could a 53 year-old Mike Tyson make a comeback?

[Keepthapeace]

Mike's my guy... imo the best hw ever was Iron Mike age 19-23 before trainer change and robin givens fiasco...

Most cats dont box especially professionally in fact they never have done anything on a professional level in sports and but mainly hyped with the aura of iron mike from childhood... but shadow boxing and boxing a 20 year younger professional face to face is a different beast all together.

Fam, Tyson looks good and fast for 53 and there are many 60 years who could move like that with edited aid I'm sure.

Mike has total reinvented himself and is taking full advantage of the new mike branding and all the love - podcast to movies to weed ranch.
Listen to Mike speak... he is definitely wise.

So it doesnt surprise me for him to get back to what made him the most feared man on the planet for brand proposes... people ALWAYS love seeing mike fight win or lose. The Last Dance with MJ probably helped motivate him to the "I'm back" edit.

Speaking of MJ, at 57 if he put up an edit fading and dunking and crossing a cat... damn near the same crowd would be hyped to see MJ play again too.

The point - i think if Mike went past 2 or 3 rounds he would get hurt... see sugar rays fight with t norris for reference... srl was the favorite and was coming off a year lay off but fighting a champion 11 yrs younger and got nearly killed in the ring... never been more sad and embarrassed for a falling champ beside Bhop getting knocked outside the ring not funny but i was like got damn that was brutal.

All the older cats on the board know what I'm talkin about that the body just doesn't respond the same even when the mind is good and the body feels great. You wake up and feel soreness in places you never felt before or you might pull a muscle or injured muscle that you never had injured before.

Mike will have the muscle memory but to sustain that level of speed and force at 53... trust something will give... thats why you only see 5 sec clips.

But i will say styles make some fights i think he'd have a shot to catch DW or AJ early as they dont move well... TF... too elusive.

But it goes past 2 rounds Mike will be in trouble.

at the end of the day he's making some good money now and he doesn't need to take the risk and it's really not worth it at 53.

I say build up the hype and make millions from the hype and pull an injury (cough cough) in camp a week before fight.

Have Evander or Lennox in DW's camp and have Mayweather in Mike's camp.

But if any 50+ can make a professional come back in their sport it's Hershel muthafcking Walker... Real talk.

 

[tallblacknyc]

One Year Later against Kevin McBride 6-11-2005
Round 5

You can pull up almost every all time great last fights and they pretty much all got washed.. Some were to old, had no more motivation, was in it just for the money.. Tyson heart wasn't in it, he looked like all hope was lost as a man..he now seems much happier, more motivated, in better shape, and mind more clearer.. Very dangerous combination for people when all those things working in Mike favor.. Hope he proves all ya nonbelievers wrong

 

[the old mongoose]

comeback or not that's a bad man

 

[double1]

 

[Race Harley]

I think it’s a mistake if he really is trying to make a “comeback”. I understand the hype but within the first round, you all will see the truth and be disappointed.

 

[ronmch20]

Sure he should make a comeback at 53 if he wants to lose what few brains he has left.

 

[doug777]

Mike's my guy... imo the best hw ever was Iron Mike age 19-23 before trainer change and robin givens fiasco...

Who was the best fighter Tyson beat during this period?.

 

[An RnB Thug]

He needs to stay retired.
Sports is a YOUNG MAN'S ENVIRONMENT
Our ligaments are not as strong , our tendons are not as strong and our recovery SUCKS

Side Note - Tyson is easily concuss now too

 

[HNIC]

You can pull up almost every all time great last fights and they pretty much all got washed.. Some were to old, had no more motivation, was in it just for the money.. Tyson heart wasn't in it, he looked like all hope was lost as a man..he now seems much happier, more motivated, in better shape, and mind more clearer.. Very dangerous combination for people when all those things working in Mike favor.. Hope he proves all ya nonbelievers wrong

I hope he enjoys the rest of his life and remains in great health. I can pull up YouTube videos just like the one above for any aging fighter.

Very few fighter can just up and retire. Most fighters go out on their shield. It happened to Ali, Evander Holyfield, Sugar Ray Leonard, Tommy Hearns, Larry Holmes, the list goes on and on. I as a boxing fan just don't want to see my heroes mentally incapacitated.

If you want to see what one too many fights will do to a boxer, look at Wilfredo Benitez, Aaron Pryor, Greg Page, Gerald McClellan & more.

I was listening to the Odd Couple Podcast last night and Evander was talking about doing some boxing exhibitions, I pray to god he sits his ass down. He's not rich like he use to be, but he is not broke either.

HNIC

 

[HNIC]

I forgot that he was this.

Mike Looks good for chasing young Ho's
All he needs is a couple of sildenafil tabs in his pocket and he is ready to roll.

As far as fighting young men, I don't think that's a good idea.

HNIC

 

[Keepthapeace]

Who was the best fighter Tyson beat during this period?.

Here's a better question... What HW had 15 1st round kos in their prime (Mike age 19-23) and beat (8) EIGHT... repeat for the young boxing fans... EIGHT former World (legit boxing organization) HW champions and (1) Gold Medalist -- KOing 6 of them... I'll wait... and if your 1st thought was Deontay Wilder I am pimp slapping you from the floor up and walking away from this non debate.

 

[doug777]

Here's a better question... What HW had 15 1st round kos in their prime (Mike age 19-23) and beat (8) EIGHT... repeat for the young boxing fans... EIGHT former World (legit boxing organization) HW champions and (1) Gold Medalist -- KOing 6 of them... I'll wait... and if your 1st thought was Deontay Wilder I am pimp slapping you from the floor up and walking away from this non debate.

Not really a better question. I guarantee that if Tyson had wins against Holyfield, Lewis, or Bowe during this period you would name one or all as the best fighters Tyson beat but because you list his dubious achievements instead of just naming the best fighter he beat tells me you don't really think much of his opposition either.

Berbick: Zero successful title defenses.

Bruno: Zero successful title defenses.

Spinks: Great Lt Heavyweight champ, undersized heavyweight.

Tubbs: Zero successful title defenses.

Holmes: Faded and inactive for nearly two years when he fought Tyson.

Thomas: One successful title defense.

I'm not sure who the other two champions Tyson beat during this period but I'm sure they're just as stellar as the other champs he beat.

 

[Keepthapeace]

Not really a better question. I guarantee that if Tyson had wins against Holyfield, Lewis, or Bowe during this period you would name one or all as the best fighters Tyson beat but because you list his dubious achievements instead of just naming the best fighter he beat tells me you don't really think much of his opposition either.

Berbick: Zero successful title defenses.

Bruno: Zero successful title defenses.

Spinks: Great Lt Heavyweight champ, undersized heavyweight.

Tubbs: Zero successful title defenses.

Holmes: Faded and inactive for nearly two years when he fought Tyson.

Thomas: One successful title defense.

I'm not sure who the other two champions Tyson beat during this period but I'm sure they're just as stellar as the other champs he beat.

Lol, Bruh, you really gonna make me waste time with a rebuttal...

First, the fact you "not sure who the other two champions" are let's me know frankly you dont care to debate Tyson's dominance of being the best heavyweight ever at age 19-23. Less than a minute Googling would have gave you that answer even if you really don't know boxing. Which you probably would have just said they too had no real title defenses either... they were hw champions, but no real real title defenses? Da fucc kind of point is that?

You certainly couldn't answer the question as there was or will ever be those many former champions beat and or ko'd in such a short time period by one fighter.

2nd, if you plan to debate something in a sport you know very little about, at least respect the sport and Google. Homes had 7 ko's after Mike destroyed him in 4 and Homes took two champions, Holifield and McCall, to the final bell in 12 and beat WBO champ Ray Merciless. That's "faded?" Stop it... let's move to the kobe, mj, lebron debate... like I said, no hw in history is ever fking with 19-23 Iron Mike

 

[doug777]

Lol, Bruh, you really gonna make me waste time with a rebuttal...

First, the fact you "not sure who the other two champions" are let's me know frankly you dont care to debate Tyson's dominance of being the best heavyweight ever at age 19-23.

I named every champion Tyson beat from age 19-23.

Which you probably would have just said they too had no real title defenses either... they were hw champions, but no real real title defenses? Da fucc kind of point is that?

The point is that other than Spinks at Lt heavy and a faded and inactive Larry Holmes not one of the other champions he fought were dominate champions. The others four champs have a total of one successful title defense among them all.

You certainly couldn't answer the question as there was or will ever be those many former champions beat and or ko'd in such a short time period by one fighter.

Yes, what Tyson did is impressive but the level of his opposition must be taken into account. Holyfield, Lewis, Bowe, Tua, and Ibeabuchi, would all beat every fighter that Tyson beat during this period. I also believe as I said in another thread that Rahman and McCall have a very good chance of beating everyone Tyson beat,

2nd, if you plan to debate something in a sport you know very little about, at least respect the sport and Google. Homes had 7 ko's after Mike destroyed him in 4 and Homes took two champions, Holifield and McCall, to the final bell in 12 and beat WBO champ Ray Merciless. That's "faded?"

When Holmes fought Tyson, Holmes had been inactive for over eighteen months. When he fought Mercer that was his sixth fight in less than a year so I'm sure you would agree that Holmes was a lot sharper for the Mercer fight than the Tyson fight.

Like I said, no hw in history is ever fking with 19-23 Iron Mike

You base that on Tyson beating fighters that about eight to twelve fighters that fought in and around his era would have also beaten?

 

[Keepthapeace]

I named every champion Tyson beat from age 19-23.The point is that other than Spinks at Lt heavy and a faded and inactive Larry Holmes not one of the other champions he fought were dominate champions. The others four champs have a total of one successful title defense among them all.

Yes, what Tyson did is impressive but the level of his opposition must be taken into account. Holyfield, Lewis, Bowe, Tua, and Ibeabuchi, would all beat every fighter that Tyson beat during this period. I also believe as I said in another thread that Rahman and McCall have a very good chance of beating everyone Tyson beat,
When Holmes fought Tyson, Holmes had been inactive for over eighteen months. When he fought Mercer that was his sixth fight in less than a year so I'm sure you would agree that Holmes was a lot sharper for the Mercer fight than the Tyson fight.
You base that on Tyson beating fighters that about eight to twelve fighters that fought in and around his era would have also beaten?

Bruh, you cant have it both ways... even if Tyson losses trainer kr after age 23... if he doesn't go to jail imo he beats holifield, lewis and bowe. Tyson too gets better without a layoff - not as good as 19-23 tyson but good enough to beat those three. Speaking of which there's a difference between beat and dominate opponents. the point is Tyson didnt just beat and outpoint opponents he dominated (former Champions) and you haven't named one heavyweight that has done that against those many former champions in that amount of time. And then you want to say spinks was a light heavyweight well so was holifield and holifield would have gotten blasted by that 19-23 tyson in the 1st round too. SRL took a 3 year layoff to beat Hagler ... Mayweather 2 years nearly against MM... and put on a master class... layoffs help and hurt some boxers, but a year or two imo for greats it helps them... and actually Homes looked real good with movement and jabs early... and did better than 2 of the 3 former hw champs did after he loss to tyson (frank bruno only lasted ONE round longer). And this was super prime iron mike. And if cus doesnt die until mid 1990's... we certainly dont ever have any of this discussion.... like prime roy jj - no real boxing fan debates anyone who rjj fought or didn't fight roy in his prime at middle, super middle, and light heavyweight run and era.

 

[Soul On Ice]

I'd watch

 

[doug777]

Bruh, you cant have it both ways...

I have no idea what you're talking about, what am I trying to have both ways?

even if Tyson losses kr after age 23... if he doesn't go to jail imo he beats holifield, lewis and bowe.

Would you agree that Tyson has never beaten a fighter as good as Holyfield, Lewis or Bowe? Then why are you sure he'd beat any of them? In thirteen rounds against Holyfield, Tyson at best won two rounds, was dominated and stopped and to prevent that from happening in the 2nd fight he quit. Against Lewis even though he was badly hurt in the first round, that's the only round that Tyson came close to winning. After that he took a sustained beating until the end of the fight. Both men were older than Tyson.

Tyson too gets better without a layoff - not as good as 19-23 tyson but good enough to beat those three.

Again, Tyson has never beaten a fighter as good as those fighters.

Speaking of which there's a difference between beat and dominate opponents. the point is Tyson didnt just beat and outpoint opponents he dominated (former Champions)

As I've said what Tyson did was impressive but his level of opposition must be accounted for.

and you haven't named one heavyweight that has done that against those many former champions in that amount of time.

When you have four world sanctioning bodies in boxing some of the champions are going to be weak just because someone becomes champion doesn't mean they're great fighters. Tyson won both of his championships by beating two of the weakest champs in boxing history. Are you really going to say that Trevor Berbick and Bruce Seldon were great fighters?

And then you want to say spinks was a light heavyweight well so was holifield and holifield would have gotten blasted by that 19-23 tyson in the 1st round too.

Actually Holyfield was a cruiserweight and the best cruiserweight in boxing history. There is no one anywhere that believes any version of Tyson stops Holyfield in the first round.

SRL took a 3 year layoff to beat Hagler ... Mayweather 2 years nearly against MM... and put on a master class... layoffs help and hurt some boxers, but a year or two imo for greats it helps them...

Are you really going to argue that a two year layoff is beneficial for a thirty-eight year old fighter?

 

[Keepthapeace]

Fam, you all over the place... that's what I mean. You want to compare the older Tyson with his performance, but not give credit (as the best ever) to the younger tyson because some of his best opponents were older.

Stick with what my point is... not the 24 or 28 or 30 year old Tyson that fought Bruce S.

The 19-23 Tyson is the best HW of alltime.

You have not proved any different. And yes, that Tyson would have destroyed a hw, light hw or cruiserweight Holyfield in the 1st.

You haven't named one heavyweight that has knocked out and has dominated as many former champions (who were legit champs at the time) and no they were not WBY or WBK or WBQ champs... they were all legit boxing organization champs. Look it up. It's simply lazy argument. And if they weren't legit champs you would have said he didn't dominate any champions.

Same argument I give for all the Deontay Wilder fans that said he has all these knockouts and all time best puncher blah blah when they really were tomato cans. Now, if you knocked out champions, to me, that's a different level knockout.

I'm saying at 38 you stated Larry was "faded" - I proved he actually wasn't... and comparing him to fights after his with tyson, I proved he actually was not, tyson was just that dominant... you have not proved otherwise. And like a super prime RJJ, he was so good opponents looked faded.

Sure the older unmotivated untrained tyson loss badly... but you keep bringing up points I'm not debating.

Prove the 19-23 Tyson is not the best hw ever... you simply have not proved he is not in that historic dominance body of work for a heavyweight or frankly, any division or fighter I can recall.

 

[doug777]

Fam, you all over the place... that's what I mean. You want to compare the older Tyson with his performance, but not give credit (as the best ever) to the younger tyson because some of his best opponents were older.

How can you say I'm not giving Tyson any credit when I've said several times that what Tyson did was impressive?

Stick with what my point is... not the 24 or 28 or 30 year old Tyson that fought Bruce S.

And yet the older Tyson managed to beat Seldon. It's funny the same quality of fighter young Tyson could beat old Tyson could beat too who'd have thunk it?

The 19-23 Tyson is the best HW of alltime.

You may have a point, not too many heavyweights could have beaten Lorenzo Boyd, Reggie Gross, and William Hosea, that's right that William Hosea.

You have not proved any different. And yes, that Tyson would have destroyed a hw, light hw or cruiserweight Holyfield in the 1st.

I'll say it again, at no point in his career has Tyson beaten anyone as good as Holyfield but Tyson is going to knockout a tougher than leather fighter like Holyfield in the first round?

You haven't named one heavyweight that has knocked out and has dominated as many former champions (who were legit champs at the time) and no they were not WBY or WBK or WBQ champs... they were all legit boxing organization champs. Look it up. It's simply lazy argument. And if they weren't legit champs you would have said he didn't dominate any champions.

I at no time have said they weren't legitimate champs. What I have said is just because someone is a champion doesn't make them a great fighter. Tyson beat Berbick for his first championship, do you believe Berbick was a great fighter?

Same argument I give for all the Deontay Wilder fans that said he has all these knockouts and all time best puncher blah blah when they really were tomato cans. Now, if you knocked out champions, to me, that's a different level knockout.

Funny how you can see Wilder's tomato cans but not Tyson's. I would take Bermane Stiverne over both Berbick and Seldon,

I'm saying at 38 you stated Larry was "faded" - I proved he actually wasn't... and comparing him to fights after his with tyson, I proved he actually was not, tyson was just that dominant... you have not proved otherwise. And like a super prime RJJ, he was so good opponents looked faded.

No way you really believe a thirty-eight year old Larry Holmes wasn't faded. Do you know what faded means?

Prove the 19-23 Tyson is not the best hw ever... you simply have not proved he is not in that historic dominance body of work for a heavyweight or frankly, any division or fighter I can recall.

There's no way to prove that to you. You think Tyson dominating a weak era proves he's the best. The same level of fighter Tyson dominated in his youth was the same level of fighter he dominated after prison. Sugar Ray Leonard fought, beat, and stopped three Hall Of Fame fighters before the age of twenty-five, not just champions but Hall Of Fame fighters, nothing Tyson has done compares to that. In the history of the welterweight division there have been only a handful of fighters that could have beaten Benitez, Duran, and Hearns but as I stated before there were eight or maybe as many as twelve fighters in and around Tyson's era that would beat every fighter Tyson beat.

 

[Keepthapeace]

How can you say I'm not giving Tyson any credit when I've said several times that what Tyson did was impressive?

And yet the older Tyson managed to beat Seldon. It's funny the same quality of fighter young Tyson could beat old Tyson could beat too who'd have thunk it?

You may have a point, not too many heavyweights could have beaten Lorenzo Boyd, Reggie Gross, and William Hosea, that's right that William Hosea.

I'll say it again, at no point in his career has Tyson beaten anyone as good as Holyfield but Tyson is going to knockout a tougher than leather fighter like Holyfield in the first round?

I at no time have said they weren't legitimate champs. What I have said is just because someone is a champion doesn't make them a great fighter. Tyson beat Berbick for his first championship, do you believe Berbick was a great fighter?

Funny how you can see Wilder's tomato cans but not Tyson's. I would take Bermane Stiverne over both Berbick and Seldon,

No way you really believe a thirty-eight year old Larry Holmes wasn't faded. Do you know what faded means?


There's no way to prove that to you. You think Tyson dominating a weak era proves he's the best. The same level of fighter Tyson dominated in his youth was the same level of fighter he dominated after prison. Sugar Ray Leonard fought, beat, and stopped three Hall Of Fame fighters before the age of twenty-five, not just champions but Hall Of Fame fighters, nothing Tyson has done compares to that. In the history of the welterweight division there have been only a handful of fighters that could have beaten Benitez, Duran, and Hearns but as I stated before there were eight or maybe as many as twelve fighters in and around Tyson's era that would beat every fighter Tyson beat.

You just talking for fun and finish debating..
Stiverne over the person who ko'd the person who ko'd LLewis and you now you are saying Stiverne could have beat a 39 year old Ali? Cause that's what Berbick did... gtfohwtbs

Now you are trying to compare legit champs Tyson dominated to DW tomato cans that's cause I know you are being funny. Google just 1 of the 1st 32 fighters from DW and tell us any of their boxing championships, legit or not (I'll accept the World Wrestling Federation heavyweight title), and you win if you name one.

Didnt that 19-23 age Mike crush the truth in the 1st rd only two years after the truth crushed bert cooper who knock down Holyfield and had him hurt?

SRL was great, no debate... but we are talking about the dominance over 8 world champions... name the world champion(s) SRL fought and dominated before Benitez and after he lost to Duran... I'll wait.

The fact you are calling Tyson dominance due to his "weak era" competition at his 19-23 age is boxing blasphemy...

RJJ didn't dominate as many world champions either but I think his prime dominance was as good as Tyson's 19-23 pound for pound in any era, but Mike still gets the nod.

 

[doug777]

You just talking for fun and finish debating..
Stiverne over the person who ko'd the person who ko'd LLewis and you now you are saying Stiverne could have beat a 39 year old Ali? Cause that's what Berbick did...

Ali was done as a serious fighter by the late seventies so yes Stiverne could have beaten the Ali that Berbick beat. I was going to say that the fact that Berbick couldn't stop Ali shows how weak he was but maybe Berbick out of respect for Ali may have taken it easy on him like Holmes did. Ali is my favorite fighter of all time so I've never watched the entire Holmes fight or any of the Berbick fight so I don't know how hard Berbick was trying in that fight.

Now you are trying to compare legit champs Tyson dominated to DW tomato cans that's cause I know you are being funny. Google just 1 of the 1st 32 fighters from DW and tell us any of their boxing championships, legit or not (I'll accept the World Wrestling Federation heavyweight title), and you win if you name one.

You're putting too much emphasis on champion, champion is not synonymous with greatness.

Didnt that 19-23 age Mike crush the truth in the 1st rd only two years after the truth crushed bert cooper who knock down Holyfield and had him hurt?

Meaning what? What point are you trying to make here?

SRL was great, no debate... but we are talking about the dominance over 8 world champions... name the world champion(s) SRL fought and dominated before Benitez and after he lost to Duran... I'll wait.

Again, too much emphasis on champion. Leonard beating and stopping Benitez, Hearns, and Duran is more impressive than anything Tyson did in his career.

The fact you are calling Tyson dominance due to his "weak era" competition at his 19-23 age is boxing blasphemy...

How about just telling me who you think was the best fighter Tyson beat during this period. I've noticed that Tyson fans will never tell you who they think is the best fighter Tyson beat. I wonder why? Come on buddy instead of telling me Tyson dominated the great champions and living legends Bonecrusher Smith and Pinklon Thomas, just tell me who was the best fighter 19-23 year old Tyson beat.

 

[Keepthapeace]

Bruh, you really are funny. You trying to debate a point with no substance.

Notice you didn't question the RJJ dominance compared to Mike Tyson's dominance who fought less champions.

Because if you are a true boxing fan you know a dominant fighter when you see one in the fact that he dominated champions is just more evidence of greatness during that time.

The fact you would just brush off champions with legit titles shows you really are someone you can't even debate with because you don't even value them over someone that's not a champion. Beating a Bulls or Lakers champ team is greater than beating a Toronto champ team true enough, but they were champs none the less. I provided you 8 champions tyson dominated and out of the 8, forget good for a sec, or the fact no one has ever dominated these many champions in their division in such a small time frame, you dont give any best ever credit to that body of work of that fact alone, so picking one is pointless. If he dominated 3 to 4... okay I see your point in questioning 4 or so, but 8 champions by major boxing organizations dominated... unheard of which is exactly why no cares if Holyfield Bowe Lewis or Klitschko returns... every boxing fan (in Tyson era) knows what hes capable of for reasons mentioned.

Eventhough, I think Stiverne was one of the worst HW champs of all time (he won a belt by default as VK vacated his title beat a true washed up Arreola who a decent hw at best) he was still a champ and DW gets a point for the win, but a 40 year old Ali would have beat Stiverne... as for Berbick, he wasnt near as good as Homes but both are better than Stiverne IMO.

The point was Iron Mike Ko'd and dominated and scared the ever-living shyt out of CW in 1st rd which I remember watching that fight live... who CW dominated a BC who nearly ko'd Holyfield... Mike would have easily finished that (hurt) Holyfield as BC couldn't... one fact he took the fight on short notice so he wasn't very conditioned.

Final point, the true boxing aficionado knows Tyson doesnt lose to Douglas, Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis or VK if Cus and KR is still in his corner and doesn't go to jail. Many that understand Tyson's greatness understands this that's why that 19-23 was the best.

 

[doug777]

Bruh, you really are funny. You trying to debate a point with no substance.

Notice you didn't question the RJJ dominance compared to Mike Tyson's dominance who fought less champions.

Because if you are a true boxing fan you know a dominant fighter when you see one in the fact that he dominated champions is just more evidence of greatness during that time.

The fact you would just brush off champions with legit titles shows you really are someone you can't even debate with because you don't even value them over someone that's not a champion. Beating a Bulls or Lakers champ team is greater than beating a Toronto champ team true enough, but they were champs none the less. I provided you 8 champions tyson dominated and out of the 8, forget good for a sec, or the fact no one has ever dominated these many champions in their division in such a small time frame, you dont give any best ever credit to that body of work of that fact alone, so picking one is pointless. If he dominated 3 to 4... okay I see your point in questioning 4 or so, but 8 champions by major boxing organizations dominated... unheard of which is exactly why no cares if Holyfield Bowe Lewis or Klitschko returns... every boxing fan (in Tyson era) knows what hes capable of for reasons mentioned.

Eventhough, I think Stiverne was one of the worst HW champs of all time (he won a belt by default as VK vacated his title beat a true washed up Arreola who a decent hw at best) he was still a champ and DW gets a point for the win, but a 40 year old Ali would have beat Stiverne... as for Berbick, he wasnt near as good as Homes but both are better than Stiverne IMO.

The point was Iron Mike Ko'd and dominated and scared the ever-living shyt out of CW in 1st rd which I remember watching that fight live... who CW dominated a BC who nearly ko'd Holyfield... Mike would have easily finished that (hurt) Holyfield as BC couldn't... one fact he took the fight on short notice so he wasn't very conditioned.

Final point, the true boxing aficionado knows Tyson doesnt lose to Douglas, Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis or VK if Cus and KR is still in his corner and doesn't go to jail. Many that understand Tyson's greatness understands this that's why that 19-23 was the best.

Who would you say is the best fighter Tyson ever beat?

 

[Keepthapeace]

Who would you say is the best fighter Tyson ever beat?

With your "washed up" "weak era" comments ready lets answer by default...Champ PT is the best compare test for Holyfield, Bowe we agree since they fought PT in the 19-23 era of prime tyson...right? Well, if so, tyson beat him in less rounds than it took both and more dominant with a TKO vs a RTD. As for Lewis, Tyson beats Tucker by UD during prime tyson who Tucker beat a McCall who crushed and KO'd Lewis in 2 rds. 5 years later.

Now, please answer mine... what heavyweight beat and dominated 8 champions in a 4 year run?

 

[doug777]

Champ PT is the best compare test for Holyfield, Bowe we agree since they fought PT in the 19-23 era of prime tyson...right?

Oh wow, no wonder you believe Tyson is so great he stopped Pinklon Thomas, if that doesn't prove his greatness nothing will.

Tyson beat Thomas in less rounds than it took both and more dominant with a TKO vs a RTD.

Pacquiao has more impressive wins over De La Hoya, Hatton, Cotto, and Mosley than Mayweather. What do you think that means?

As for Lewis, Tyson beats Tucker by UD during prime tyson who Tucker beat a McCall who crushed and KO'd Lewis in 2 rds. 5 years later.

Ali fought Frazier and Norton a total of six times all six fights were tough. Foreman fought Frazier and Norton and completely dominated and overwhelmed both men stopping them both in the second round. Ali fought and stopped Foreman in eight rounds. What do you think that means?

Now, please answer mine... what heavyweight beat and dominated 8 champions in a 4 year run?

I'll concede no other heavyweight has dominated as many champs in a four year period. That being said other than Holmes and Spinks the other champs he fought accomplished nothing in boxing.

 

[Keepthapeace]

so you couldn't debate the PT comparison so you took the comparison to a different weight division, but when I mentioned a total dominate fighter in prime RJJ like a prime Iron Mike you totally ignored that comparison on greatness because of skills not level persons they beat bc you know I was making my point you couldn't disprove otherwise. Tyson gets the edge because he did it against all former champions which you now agree no one in the history of boxing has done. Oh and btw still is the youngest hw champ to unify all major belts... for a reason as a prime Iron Mike 19-23.

Pac and Floyd is a completely different debate. 1st Floyd made JMM look like an amateur...some say it was worst schooling than his AG fight... two years away from boxing . Last time Pac fought JMM I believe he was not beaten, but destroyed. 2nd, ODLH last fight was Pac...what does that tell you?

Final point, in comparison to prime Mike, if prime MJ had a career ending injury after his 1st 3 peat, imo, prime MJ would still have been considered the best sg of all time, if not the best player of all time... sure we can say those Lakers, suns, or trailblazers wasn't legendary all time great teams he beat, but championship talent nonetheless he dominated. Simlar, we are having the Gale Sayers debate on short body of work of greatness. Look him up if you are not a sports fan.

You can continue to down play it, but not just beating, but dominating 8 legit hw champions in any era is unheard of... still is, 30 years before and nearly 30 years after.

 

[godmc]

I just watched highlights of foreman becoming champion again at 45...and he could take a punch....Tyson is what. 53? Gets frustrated easily? He better not try a serious come back.

 

[christop]

I think he has a few fights in him. He hasn't shown this level of focus in 30 years.

 

[Keepthapeace]

Being both the oldest and youngest HW champ of all time is an interesting thought and Tyson fighting would give us fans some excitement, but no way a 53 year old Tyson or even if it was Money May should be returning unless it's like what Money May did...taking a fight with a foolish untested young asian boxer for millions. If it happens still... it probably would be an Arab from Dubai willing to pay mike millions for an exhibition... but Mike fighting a top hw for 10 or 12 rounds should not be sanctioned.

But at least this motivation keeps Mike in good shape at 53 and motivates something in all of us.

 

[doug777]

so you couldn't debate the PT comparison so you took the comparison to a different weight division

It's the same difference. You believe that because Tyson performed better against Thomas than both Holyfield and Bowe that means Tyson would have beaten both men, it doesn't. I gave you an example of Pacquiao preforming better than Mayweather against some of their common opponents, it doesn't mean Pacquiao is better than Mayweather just like it doesn't mean Tyson is better than Holyfield or Bowe. I'll give you another example involving your fighter, Tyson fought Bruno during the 19-23 period he stopped Bruno in five, he fought him again after prison and stopped him in three. Does that mean post prison Tyson was better than 19-23 Tyson?

When I mentioned a total dominate fighter in prime RJJ like a prime Iron Mike you totally ignored that comparison on greatness because of skills not level persons they beat bc you know I was making my point you couldn't disprove otherwise.

I have to be honest here and I'm not saying this to be funny or insulting but I'm not sure if English is your first language or you just have problems with structuring sentences but it's sometimes hard to decipher what you're saying. I really don't know what you're saying about Jones.

Tyson gets the edge because he did it against all former champions which you now agree no one in the history of boxing has done.

Champion is not synonymous with greatness, other than Holmes and Spinks the other champs he beat would probably not make the list for the top thousand best heavyweights.

Oh and btw still is the youngest hw champ to unify all major belts... for a reason as a prime Iron Mike 19-23.

That's because a weak fighter Trevor Berbick was champ. If 1968 Ali, 1971 Frazier, 1974 Foreman, or 1981 Holmes were champs at the time, team Tyson doesn't put their young prospect in with any of them.

Pac and Floyd is a completely different debate.

No it's not, you believe if fighter a does better against fighter c than fighter b did then fighter a must be better than fighter b. How is the Pacquiao/Mayweather example not applicable?

1st Floyd made JMM look like an amateur...some say it was worst schooling than his AG fight... two years away from boxing . Last time Pac fought JMM I believe he was not beaten, but destroyed. 2nd, ODLH last fight was Pac...what does that tell you?

I have no idea what point you're trying to make here.

sure we can say those Lakers, suns, or trailblazers wasn't legendary all time great teams

Now right here you seem to understand that not all champions are created equally, why don't you seem to understand that most of the champs Tyson beat weren't that good?

You can continue to down play it, but not just beating, but dominating 8 legit hw champions in any era is unheard of... still is, 30 years before and nearly 30 years after.

I downplay it because it's not as impressive as you seem to think. As I pointed out before there were quite a few fighters in and around Tyson's era that could've beaten every fighter Tyson beat. Tyson Fought four Hall Of Fame fighters in his career with a losing record of 2-3 against them, he does have two stoppage wins but he was also stopped twice and had himself DQ'd to prevent himself from getting stopped again.

 

[slam]

 

[Keepthapeace]

I gave you an example of Pacquiao preforming better than Mayweather against some of their common opponents,

Actually you didn't. Performing "better" against opponents "washed up" to your point, like an Oscar De La Hoya does not prove a performance "better." Rickey Hatton was done after being schooled by Mayweather. And Mosely they both got a UD win... but was he dope free? It seems you try to throw anything to stick. The one opponent Mayweather and Pacquiao fought at the same level (no one was washed up) was Juan Manuel Marquez and Floyd destroyed him and Mayweather beat Pac straight up both outside of their prime, certainly, but he won easily... so how is that the same comparison if I'm talking prime Mike 19-23 who they didn't fight during that period? In fact, Lewis is as old as Tyson and was fighting for a gold medal while Tyson was fighting for a HW Title. Same level or was both Tyson and Berbick no better than an amateur? I'll wait...

I'll give you another example involving your fighter, Tyson fought Bruno during the 19-23 period he stopped Bruno in five, he fought him again after prison and stopped him in three. Does that mean post prison Tyson was better than 19-23 Tyson?

Bruh... please stay on topic as I understand you want to move away from prime 19-23 Tyson opponents he dominated like a good fighter in Frank Bruno I, being simply better than Bruno II... You know who Bruno's last fight was? Correct, Tyson. So clearly he lost he boxing desire. Bruno crushed James Tillis by ko early so he was a better fighter early and Tyson just loss Kevin Rooney so training was on the decline after rooney as I said before... if rooney and cus is still around, Bruno gets it in 2 or 3 the 1st time.

I have to be honest here and I'm not saying this to be funny or insulting but I'm not sure if English is your first language or you just have problems with structuring sentences but it's sometimes hard to decipher what you're saying. I really don't know what you're saying about Jones.

Bruh, (its called voice to chat) as there is no need to insult on the slight bc you cant address the issue... I'm sure you are in your 20's or not use to losing a debate? Here is Trump level explanation... Prime RJJ was just as dominant as prime Tyson except Tyson dominated more champions. Therefore, if you agree prime RJJ is arguably the best ever pound for pound then you also must put prime Tyson in that discussion and give Tyson the edge.

Champion is not synonymous with greatness,

Champion is not synonymous with "weak" ethier. I didn't say Tyson beat hall of Famers. However, he not only beat Champions, but he dominated them.

If 1968 Ali, 1971 Frazier, 1974 Foreman, or 1981 Holmes were champs at the time, team Tyson doesn't put their young prospect in with any of them.

Well that's for another debate, but prime tyson obliterated an undefeated champ in Spinks who beat the longest reigning and 2nd most title defenses champ ever in Holmes twice what just 4 or 5 years later (1985/1986)?

No it's not, you believe if fighter a does better against fighter c than fighter b did then fighter a must be better than fighter b. How is the Pacquiao/Mayweather example not applicable? I have no idea what point you're trying to make here.

Yes you do. I explained earlier with Pac and May. For our HW discussion I broke the individual fighter down in the era time frame they had in common to be more fair since you wanted to try to compare Mike's greatness bt 19-23 to same level of fighter of Holyfield and Bowe at the same time - which he didn't fight them in his prime of 19-23. It's a total body of work for that particular time frame... nothing more nothing less... an example is Bhop - the boxing record of the first 20-1 Bhop is not as good a fighter as the 26-2 Bhop. Mike dominated early this career where Bhop dominated mid-to-later in this career.

Now right here you seem to understand that not all champions are created equally, why don't you seem to understand that most of the champs Tyson beat weren't that good?

Because you want to separate (LEGIT boxing organization champs) tyson beat and compare them to Ali, Frazier, Homes, Foreman, Holyfield, Bowe - as if having the hw champ against Tyson means you had to be a Hall of Fame champion. My opinion the Champs that Tyson beat would be the same title champions in today's actual "weak era." BUT if Tyson Fury dominates as many boxing organization champions in this era the way Iron Mike Tyson did... he would also certainly be in a best all time conversation such as this. He has two down and 6 more to go.

I downplay it because it's not as impressive as you seem to think. As I pointed out before there were quite a few fighters in and around Tyson's era that could've beaten every fighter Tyson beat.

Here you go again with that simply "beat" word... no he didn't just "beat" one or a couple or 4 or 5 legit champs of the era... he dominated 8 legit champions in a 4 year span and would have dominated more had he had both Cus and Rooney still been in his life... Again, dominating a fighter is much different than just beating or winning against an opponent. Watch Fury Wilder one and then watch Fury Wilder two and you'll be able to see the difference in "beat" vs dominate. Except Mike Tyson dominated more champs, even worse than what TF did to Wilder.

Tyson Fought four Hall Of Fame fighters in his career with a losing record of 2-3 against them, he does have two stoppage wins but he was also stopped twice and had himself DQ'd to prevent himself from getting stopped again.


- save time and simply talk about his loss to Douglas- I would argue on your behalf that's much worse...

But for the 10th to 12th time we're talking about prime Tyson 19-23, not anything after 23 or even the Douglas fight at 23.

You say I have no english or written skills, cool... but I could be debating with someone very slow, no disrespect, but the things you dont understand I stated is very (not normal to say the least) please read this slower... What happen to Tyson outside of prime Tyson 19-23 is NOT the debate Fam.

It's simple, you feel his body of work from 19-23 was against weak opponents even as champions, therefore his dominance was "impressive" you said, but just not good enough for a top HW ranking of all time right?

So based on just the 19-23 age prime Tyson... where do you rank Tyson all time? Curious...

 

[34real]

The sport needs someone or something to breath life into it where it can seperate itself from MMA and bring back the respect to that art and if Mike can do that,great.

 

[doug777]

So based on just the 19-23 age prime Tyson... where do you rank Tyson all time? Curious...

Ali
Foreman
Holmes
Lewis
Holyfield
Frazier
Liston
Tyson
Louis
Vitali Klitschko

 

[doug777]

So based on just the 19-23 age prime Tyson... where do you rank Tyson all time? Curious...

Check out of this thread about the second tier fighters of the seventies, other than Norton who was awarded his title none of these fighters were champions because they fought in the toughest era in heavyweight boxing history. I believe all of these fighters would run the gauntlet on all the champions Tyson beat.

The Best Second Tier Heavyweight Boxer Of The 70's?

Ali, Frazier and Foreman were the big dogs of the heavyweight division in the 70's, who was the second best? Jerry Quarry Nickname(s) Irish, The Bellflower Bomber Rated at Heavyweight Nationality American Born May 15, 1945 Bakersfield, California Died January 3, 1999 (aged 53) Stance Orthodox...

www.bgol.us