'prime mike tyson'

First topic message reminder :

I am a regular viewer of these boards and have been since it was the old 606 o the bbc website, one thing that perplexes me is the 'prime tyson' myth which has developed and is contiually talked about on these boards

tyson was no doubt great in the mid to late 80's but:
1 the division was poor in my view
2. his 'peak' was short and therefore does not deserve the credit it gets
3. when he should have been at his 'peak' he did not deliver

what are your guys views?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You said he lost to the best opponents he faced................

Considering Spinks and Holmes were the best fighters he faced then it's a false statement....

Douglas was better than these two ???

Holy and Lewis beat a sliding Tyson...

that version of holmes wasn't better than lewis or holyfield might aswell say that calzaghe is better than RJJ on your thinking. not sure what i said had anything to do with p4p. im sure tyson could have beat SRR doesn't mean that would be his best win!!

You said he lost to the best fighters he faced which wasn't true!!...........Then you moan about holmes being past it....

Tyson was past it but you've not mentioned that??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You said he lost to the best fighters he faced which wasn't true!!...........Then you moan about holmes being past it....

Tyson was past it but you've not mentioned that??

clearly i did, read through what i wrote. there's a difference at being past it from a long hard career and one because he couldn't be arsed training tyson was 30 when he fought holy there was nothing physical that would have left him at that point. lewis and holyfield at heavyweight were better fighters than spinks at heavy and the old Holmes its not that hard to understand your clearly just avoiding the point. would SRR be his best win then if tyson beat him?? he's the best p4p ever

Answer me these questions.........

Did Holmes lose to the best fighters he fought ??

Was the Holmes Tyson beat any worse than the Tyson Lewis beat.........

Why is Spinks a bad heavy..he only lost to a prime Tyson ?? He beat Larry twice....and Cooney ...Tunney beat an old Dempsey and is top 15

ignoring anything i put and just asking questions back, not wasting my time. quite happy to debate with anyone who's willing to address points in a discussion

I've destroyed your argument...........

1. Pointing out that spinks and Holmes were higher........
2. That Holmes was just as good as the Tyson..Lewis beat.
3. That Spinks only lost to Tyson at heavy....so you can't judge him..
4. That Holmes lost to the best fighters he fought..

Just run along and remember to think before you post....NEXT!!!

Ha ha yeah right please tell me which of any of them were my points and not where you just tried to twist a argument to your advantage. Nothing of them are anything I said

Are you kidding me ???

Your whole point was that you marked Tyson down because he lost to the best fighters he fought......

You also said Holmes was past it !!! Even though he had success afterwards...

Douglas was the only guy to beat prime Tyson............and he isn't in the same league as Holmes and Spinks...

and as you give Holmes a pass against Tyson..........I'll use your logic and excuse him against Lewis....

Unless you count a half dead Ali...Then Holmes lost to the best fighter he fought Tyson.......So Holy beat Tyson and Tyson beat Holmes...

Mark them both down...and out of the top 10..

So holmes wasnt past it?

Would spinks beat lewis then?

What was the reason why tyson was past it at such a early age?

Its easy this questioning bit

compelling and rich wrote:

What was the reason why tyson was past it at such a early age?

I know that one it is because Gus Tomato died.

compelling and rich wrote:its good to see tyson can still produce so much debate, whats next hattons ducking witter thread?

not read through 5 pages but my main reasons why tyson doesn't make my top ten are that he was beat by the best opponents he faced. yes he wasnt at his best during this period but i dont see this as anything other than tysons own fault. dont want to go into another legal debate thread about the washington case but tysons life choices and his inability to handle the fame and money were a big downfall in him. i criticize naz for losing his hunger and not training properly why does tyson get a free pass? also would consider a fighters hunger and ability to motivate himself right up there as what makes a great fighter just as much as physical attributes like an iron chin, great left hook etc. dont remember ali giving up after his exile. also think there are still big questions marks about how tyson would fair mentally against the other ATG's

Just thought repost this as to what I actually said, before truss makes up some more stuff

Mate you said tyson lost to the best fighters he fought..right?? Which is why you didn't have him top 10!!

So it's irrelevant whether Spinks beats Lewis because............

If Holmes was past it then surely Tyson was past it when he lost to Lewis ??

Have you heard of Edwin Rosario ???..He was past it at 24...

Holmes lost to the best fighters he fought..........Spinks and Tyson........

You don't mark him down........

What does it matter If it was Tyson's own fault..If you're shot you are shot..

What am I making up....Your argument sucks.

I consider lewis and holyfield better oppenents than the old holmes and light heavyweight spinks whats so hard about that.

I do give holmes more credit as he had more legitimate reasons to be shot. I dont consider unfit or not motivated as equal to being too old

Old Holmes went on to beat Mercer...who nearly beat Lewis....

The Tyson that lost to Lewis was finished....

So whether you rate him better is irrelevant as you are saying Holmes was past it and giving him a free pass.....and yet slapping Tyson for being past it too.......

So I can't understand how using your logic you can hold Lewis against Tyson..

Hypocritical..

Don't you see?? I'm marking Ali down for Berbick..

Did Joe Louis lose to the best fighters he fought ??

Was naz shot against barerra? Theres a difference

Did Joe Louis lose to the best two heavies he fought??.........The first or second best heavy of alltime on most lists..........

Tyson lost to Lewis..16 years after becoming champion and to Holy ten years after becoming champ...

Louis lost to Charles and Marciano..ten and twelve years after....

I guess Louis isn't top 10 either in your list??

Yeah louis has no cv to back him up has he? Tysons best wins as you have said are a old holmes and a light heavy. Not particularly brillant compared to louis

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Mate you said tyson lost to the best fighters he fought..right?? Which is why you didn't have him top 10!!

So it's irrelevant whether Spinks beats Lewis because............

If Holmes was past it then surely Tyson was past it when he lost to Lewis ??

Have you heard of Edwin Rosario ???..He was past it at 24...

Holmes lost to the best fighters he fought..........Spinks and Tyson........

You don't mark him down........

What does it matter If it was Tyson's own fault..If you're shot you are shot..

What am I making up....Your argument sucks.

So the same would surely apply to Lewis when he beat Tyson, yes? Although you do contradict yourself a bit.

Rowley wrote:

compelling and rich wrote:

What was the reason why tyson was past it at such a early age?

I know that one it is because Gus Tomato died.

I still have guilt over the gus tomato poster from the old 606. Poor guy never posted again and we were robbed of any future pearls of wisdom. Still, he went out at the top.

Joe Louis cv is better than Tyson's ??? really...

Tyson isn't top 10 because he lost to the best fighters he fought and yet Louis did the same...........

Go figure..

88Chris05 wrote:Strongback, in case you're unaware, I believe Superfly's list there was ranking the Heavyweights purely on a who beats who basis, rather than taking all aspects in to account. Certainly not a horrible list from that point of view.

Yeah! Screw you, Strongy and you as well, T-Bone!

milkyboy wrote:

I still have guilt over the gus tomato poster from the old 606. Poor guy never posted again and we were robbed of any future pearls of wisdom. Still, he went out at the top.

Two ways of looking at it Milky. I'm a glass half full kind of guy, not many people can pass into forum folklore with one post.

Amazed that Superfly has George at number two, his record in titles is probably the worst amongst any in the top fifteen. If wins against a made to measure Frazier and Norton, and a lucky Ko of a blown up light heavy weight are enough to get you to number two , then god help us.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:

azania wrote:The Canadian Lewis is top 15. The British Lewis is top 5. God save the queen.  

Usual xenophobic tripe. Back on ignore. Honestly, I can't even give you 5 minutes.

Still playing that game I see. Pathetic.

It's head to head, HH based on absolute peak (as per the parameters in Shah's original article). You really fancy all that many heavyweights to stand up to Pre-Rumble Foreman?

Fair enough then.

Long time reader of the boxing forums here, and also on the old 606 as well. Ive never bothered signing up or commenting on here because some of you guys are like women lol!

Anybody who thinks that the Tyson that faced Lennox Lewis was anything other than a complete shell of his peak self really needs to think about wether they should be commenting on any boxing at all.

I could have beat the Tyson that faced Lewis...and I was in my early teens when the fight took place.

Probably the first and last comment I'll ever bother to make on the boxing section of this forum...i reckon only about 15% of you have any part of a clue about boxing and thats probably being generous. I'd say about 5% have ever laced up a pair of gloves.

Ironically the majority on here seem to hate Trussman but he seems to have more of an idea than most!

EX7EY wrote:

Probably the first and last comment I'll ever bother to make on the boxing section of this forum...!

Aah please stay.

EX7EY wrote:Long time reader of the boxing forums here, and also on the old 606 as well. Ive never bothered signing up or commenting on here because some of you guys are like women lol!

Anybody who thinks that the Tyson that faced Lennox Lewis was anything other than a complete shell of his peak self really needs to think about wether they should be commenting on any boxing at all.

I could have beat the Tyson that faced Lewis...and I was in my early teens when the fight took place.

Probably the first and last comment I'll ever bother to make on the boxing section of this forum...i reckon only about 15% of you have any part of a clue about boxing and thats probably being generous. I'd say about 5% have ever laced up a pair of gloves.

Ironically the majority on here seem to hate Trussman but he seems to have more of an idea than most!

It's a shame you're not staying, mate. We need some charm around here.

EX7EY wrote:I could have beat the Tyson that faced Lewis...

No you couldn't!

EX7EY wrote:Long time reader of the boxing forums here, and also on the old 606 as well. Ive never bothered signing up or commenting on here because some of you guys are like women lol!

Anybody who thinks that the Tyson that faced Lennox Lewis was anything other than a complete shell of his peak self really needs to think about wether they should be commenting on any boxing at all.

I could have beat the Tyson that faced Lewis...and I was in my early teens when the fight took place.

Probably the first and last comment I'll ever bother to make on the boxing section of this forum...i reckon only about 15% of you have any part of a clue about boxing and thats probably being generous. I'd say about 5% have ever laced up a pair of gloves.

Ironically the majority on here seem to hate Trussman but he seems to have more of an idea than most!

I like him..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

EX7EY wrote:Long time reader of the boxing forums here, and also on the old 606 as well. Ive never bothered signing up or commenting on here because some of you guys are like women lol!

Anybody who thinks that the Tyson that faced Lennox Lewis was anything other than a complete shell of his peak self really needs to think about wether they should be commenting on any boxing at all.

I could have beat the Tyson that faced Lewis...and I was in my early teens when the fight took place.

Probably the first and last comment I'll ever bother to make on the boxing section of this forum...i reckon only about 15% of you have any part of a clue about boxing and thats probably being generous. I'd say about 5% have ever laced up a pair of gloves.

Ironically the majority on here seem to hate Trussman but he seems to have more of an idea than most!

I like him..

Blue Oyster this weekend for the pair of you?

He is right though, apart from the TRUSSMAN bit. You have alot of people on here who think they know everthing on boxing and are happy to fling insults around when someone disagrees with them. The actual amount of people on here who know alot about boxing is small. It was eye opening to after being criticised for thinking Haye would beat Klitschko that looking back to peoples predictions on it basically nobody called the fight correctly. Everyone is an expert after the event.

winchester wrote:He is right though, apart from the TRUSSMAN bit. You have alot of people on here who think they know everthing on boxing and are happy to fling insults around when someone disagrees with them. The actual amount of people on here who know alot about boxing is small. It was eye opening to after being criticised for thinking Haye would beat Klitschko that looking back to peoples predictions on it basically nobody called the fight correctly. Everyone is an expert after the event.

You got the haye v klitschko result wrong though because you predicted haye to win hahha

So what? Your seldom right about anything, boring and have a spectacular talent for missing the point. And you think the Klitschkos are super duper and anyone who says otherwise about them is a very bold boy and needs to prove certified evidence on legal headed paper approved in a court of law.

winchester wrote:So what? Your seldom right about anything, boring and have a spectacular talent for missing the point. And you think the Klitschkos are super duper and anyone who says otherwise about them is a very bold boy and needs to prove certified evidence on legal headed paper approved in a court of law.

Consider yourself told...CS !!

Thanks for the warm welcome guys haha.

You lot won't realise it but after observing on pretty much a daily basis for years without making a comment you kinda get to know people. Not saying Trussman knows all but I find it kinda funny that a lot on here diss him yet when he talks boxing it makes a lot of sense to me.

I find these threads ridiculous! Of course Mike Tyson had a prime and in it he would be a match for anybody. I don't buy into all this would he have beat this boxer or that, if they didnt fight you can never say because at the end of the day one boxer could dispatch another very easily but find the style of somebody else difficult to deal with, that's boxing.

People don't seem to realise that Mike Tysons prime was in his really early years and he got polluted by yes men who just screwed up his mind. We'll probably never know how good he could have actually been, but to question how good he was is silly.

THE greatest....no. One of the ATG's, definately.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

winchester wrote:So what? Your seldom right about anything, boring and have a spectacular talent for missing the point. And you think the Klitschkos are super duper and anyone who says otherwise about them is a very bold boy and needs to prove certified evidence on legal headed paper approved in a court of law.

Consider yourself told...CS !!

haha

EX7EY wrote:Thanks for the warm welcome guys haha.

You lot won't realise it but after observing on pretty much a daily basis for years without making a comment you kinda get to know people. Not saying Trussman knows all but I find it kinda funny that a lot on here diss him yet when he talks boxing it makes a lot of sense to me.

I find these threads ridiculous! Of course Mike Tyson had a prime and in it he would be a match for anybody. I don't buy into all this would he have beat this boxer or that, if they didnt fight you can never say because at the end of the day one boxer could dispatch another very easily but find the style of somebody else difficult to deal with, that's boxing.

People don't seem to realise that Mike Tysons prime was in his really early years and he got polluted by yes men who just screwed up his mind. We'll probably never know how good he could have actually been, but to question how good he was is silly.

THE greatest....no. One of the ATG's, definately.

Isn't that what most people are saying, me old china?

Maybe they are saying that mate. But unlike most people I'm not arguing, I'm having some input.

The fact you even posted that tells me a lot about you as a poster already.....do you get into arguments here a lot mate? Haha

EX7EY wrote:Maybe they are saying that mate. But unlike most people I'm not arguing, I'm having some input.

The fact you even posted that tells me a lot about you as a poster already.....do you get into arguments here a lot mate? Haha

Of course I do. People have arguments against my quaint and noble English spirit.

Duty281 wrote:

EX7EY wrote:Maybe they are saying that mate. But unlike most people I'm not arguing, I'm having some input.

The fact you even posted that tells me a lot about you as a poster already.....do you get into arguments here a lot mate? Haha

Of course I do. People have arguments against my quaint and noble English spirit.

Nothing quaint about your style......About as quaint as Dick turpin..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

EX7EY wrote:Maybe they are saying that mate. But unlike most people I'm not arguing, I'm having some input.

The fact you even posted that tells me a lot about you as a poster already.....do you get into arguments here a lot mate? Haha

Of course I do. People have arguments against my quaint and noble English spirit.

Nothing quaint about your style......About as quaint as Dick turpin..

Quaint, noble, gallant, chivalrous, or heroic. Pick whichever, for I am an Englishman, and I shall carry myself with an air of superiority, sir.

England, my England. 

Can you speak German ??

Good god no.

You're a lucky boy then..

...till we have built Jerusalem, in England's green and pleasant land!