Top 10 Greatest KOs

agREED. All of us have our biases. Everyone does. But I also believe that some of us are better than others at not letting like or dislike cloud the perception of fighters and their careers. I try really hard to not do that and I do think that I am one of the better posters in that regard. And there are some other folks who do so as well. And as for some others...not so much.

 

no, that is definitley true

we all have our favorites

its not unusual for me to perk up like a dog hearing the box of biscuits being shaken when Whitaker's name comes up, same with broadwayjoe with Tommy Hearns or you with Duran or REED with Roy, but I think we are pretty objective even about those guys we like the most, and we are fair to the guys we hate

 

and for broadwayjoe, PAZ SUCKS BALLS IN HELL FOREVER:flip:

 

::

 

I'm a tyson nuthugger now::

Because he beats Frazier 100 times out of 100?
Because he beats Ali 80 out of 100 times?

These are style match-ups. You will never hear me argue that Tyson was greater than Ali or Holmes or Lennox or...etc.

Retaining the objectivity to criticize distinguishes you from being a nuthugger. I wouldn't accuse you of being a nuthugger for anybody, even the Paz stuff, you half are kidding and wouldn't bat an eye in attacking him. I have accused you quite recently of being a Tyson hater, and this comes from years of MM posts and spats about him. There's no way to settle the issue, especially if you think Frazier could beat Tyson, among other things.

But nut-huggery is a more sinster thing.

Prime example, Ike claims to me that Winky Wright - Bernard Hopkins was a draw. I've called him a god damn retard to his face as recently as Saturday for this take, its just not something I believe to be accurate. Same goes on Tyson with you guys. There are alot of posters here that are quick to dismiss him and talk as if he wasn't the most talented HW ever (or comparable to Ali at the least) And worst of all for me personally is this notion that he had no heart/desire. He took two of the most savage ass-whipping I've ever seen and didn't stop coming. If he's limited against a certain style or has problems with physical guys, thats a legit. criticism. but to say he didn't have the intangibles is inaccurate, which has been my only point all along.

 

What I have highlighted are not facts, these are your opinions. You present them as facts, which is the problem with most of the stuff you post around here. Opinions, half truths, and outright lies instead of facts. And when you are proven wrong you either get insulting, avoid what was said in response to you, or both.

And...how is my saying that Tyson is "great", "one of the best ever at his weight" or "had an impressive run" DISMISSING him? That makes no sense. One of my biggest objections to any response I ever get from you is that you ignore what was actually said in favor of posting (making up) something that agrees with your take, whether it is accurate or not.

There are two kinds of "heart". One type is the wherewithal to take a beating without quitting...which MANY fighters have, including Tyson. Another type of "heart" is the ability to reverse the flow of a fight and come out a winner when it looks like a loss or the ability to rally late and pull out a closely contested fight. Think of Ray Leonard against Hearns, Chavez against Taylor and other examples of great champions rallying in the later rounds to pull out a fight that they would have lost if it went to the scorecards. Matthew Saad Muhammed was known for this as well.

Tyson never demonstrated this in his career. When he fell behind in a fight, he lost. He did show heart in that he took many rounds of punishment, but that's not the same as rallying back from adversity to win. Now you can say you believe he did possess the necessary intangible to do so, but since he never did so in his whole career...it sounds like something you just really, really wish was true.

And, just in case you forgot, you did not just accuse me of being a Tyson hater...you attacked me personally and fabricated statements that you claim I made. And, of course, I did show your statements to be something other than the truth and you, as usual, avoided my responses which demonstrated that.

 

there is no proven wrong in a MM. There is evidence. There is no evidence to suggest Joe Frazier could beat Mike Tyson.

Take Joe Frazier, now add a right hand, now add a jab, now add a defense not completely reliant on slips. Now add 30 lbs, and double the handspeed.

I don't see how this can be disputed. There is video evidence to compare the two guys. why would I get into a spitting war with anyone. You are not an unreasonable poster. You obviously follow and know boxing. There's a lack of nuthuggery that makes you a good poster. After awhile, the bias to certain guys and styles wears. You favor older fighters. Which in some cases is fine, and other cases is not in my eyes, this is fine. I just want criticisms based on merit for guys.

"Tyson didn't have heart" is not a legitimate criticism, it is in direct contradiction to how he fought (especially in his losses.)

Its not that the claim is negative, "RJJ doesn't have heart" is a legitimate criticism. You watch him and see the physical talent. And then you watch him carry guys that have no business being in the same arena. You watch his performances against Tarver 3, in his prime allowing fights with Glen kelly, etc. to go a long way.

 

To me that isn't heart. Leonard has the tools to come back against Hearns, Chavez the tools to catch up to Taylor. Tyson dropped Douglas not long before getting KO'd. He was not able to do that against Lennox and Evander because of the physicality. In a potential matchup against someone who doesn't hold/headbutt/etc. you can go deeper.

 

MM's belong in the MM forum. If you would like to open a Tyson-Frazier thread there, or go back to that heavyweight tournament...I will be happy to give you my two cents on that matchup. This isn't the place for that discussion.

I don't favor older fighters...this is just something you say because the reverse is said about you.

And can you just not read, or are you just that stubborn? I didn't say Tyson didn't have heart. In case you missed it...

There are two kinds of "heart". One type is the wherewithal to take a beating without quitting...which MANY fighters have, including Tyson. Another type of "heart" is the ability to reverse the flow of a fight and come out a winner when it looks like a loss or the ability to rally late and pull out a closely contested fight. Think of Ray Leonard against Hearns, Chavez against Taylor and other examples of great champions rallying in the later rounds to pull out a fight that they would have lost if it went to the scorecards. Matthew Saad Muhammed was known for this as well.

Tyson never demonstrated this in his career. When he fell behind in a fight, he lost. He did show heart in that he took many rounds of punishment, but that's not the same as rallying back from adversity to win. Now you can say you believe he did possess the necessary intangible to do so, but since he never did so in his whole career...it sounds like something you just really, really wish was true.

If you can refute this with something other than claiming that I said Tyson lacks heart, please do so.

And as for why would you get into a spitting war....did you or did you not just recently call me a "Piece of shit"??? In case you forgot or want to deny it...you did.

 

DisagrREED. It is absolutely part of having heart. Tyson didn't have it in him to rally down the stretch. He never did well when he was not dictating the fight. And let's not start trying to use headbutts as the reason Tyson lost to Holyfield. Tyson was just in there with a better and tougher fighter with more determination.

 

Thats just ridiculous. Was John Ruiz a better and tougher fighter than his opponents?

He was allowed to hold and hump. There's no defense for that. In the 5 years between Tyson Holyfield was supposed to happen, Holyfield put on 20+lbs of muscle so that he could be physical with Mike. There are a bunch of reasons Tyson lost. Holyfield was the better fighter, but lets not claim his determination is what won the game for him, thats a made up feature used almost exclusively against Tyson.

Its a mental toughness that Tyson doesn't have. I agree with that. Its something he never had. But that only matters against people who would be able to force the battle with him. Frazier doesn't have the size or skills to deal with Tyson. Ali NEVER dictated pace or imposed himself. That's what makes Tyson a bad match-up for them both.

 

He reversed the flow against Botha.

 

C'mon...it was the 5th round. Geez. Will I next be hearing about the dramatic come from behind KO of Tony Tubbs?

 

So now Holyfield is no better than Ruiz? Careful now...you were almost being reasonable for a little while there but now you are starting to get ridiculous.

And you can play the MM game with Ali and Frazier all you want, but it does nothing but pad your argument with fluff. Those fights never took place, so to use Mythical Matchups in support of your argument shows how without substance it really is. And by the way....the notion that Ali would share the same fate as Tyrell Biggs against Tyson is just plain ridiculous. BTW...your Tyson-Ali prediction is pretty much the same as Kid Dynamite's...which isn't a compliment. At least we have been spared you telling us that Biggs was better than Ali. Thank God for small favors.

You can split hairs over whether to call it mental toughness or heart, if that helps you sleep better, but the bottom line is when the going got tough, Tyson got beaten.
.

 

hit the nail on the head

 

Dude, holyfield beat up and out bullied the bully, end of story

To try and take that victory away from Holyfield and say it was because of headbutts is ridiculous

What Holyfield did to Tyson in 1996 bore no resemblance to John Ruiz barely winning fights against terrible opponents

 

How much resemblance did Tyson in 1996 have to Tyson in 1986?

 

But ALREADY we'd Seen SIGNS of Tyson LOSING it Mentally (Trying to Break Botha's Arm) N those 1st 5 Rounds & he was Getting SCHOOLED, Quite Honestly...Tyson LOST Every Round Until the KO...



REED:mj:

 

He'd lost every round before it...and that was in a ten round fight, meaning if he didn't score at least a knockdown then the best he was probably looking at was a draw.

Lewis gets a lot of credit for turning the tide against Bruno and that was in the seventh of 12, meaning they were both behind with five remaining.

How many examples do you want?

He only lost once, pre-prison (his prime), and in the fight he lost he nearly scored a knockout, late....so there's not a big sample size from him when he was at his best.

No he didn't turn the tide against Holyfield, and if you're inclined to use his post-prison fights against him to criticize the pre-prison version, you would use this fight in the way you're doing.

I'm not inclined to do that to nearly the extent you are.

 

How many better heavyweights in the world were there than him in 1996?

Was he not a 15-1 favorite to win that fight?

Furthermore, what heavyweight did Tyson face that was as good as Holyfield in 1986-1991???

He came out firing in that fight and Holyfield didnt go anywhere and he pushed him back, he roughed him up and Tyson didnt know what to do with him, its as simple as that... he could not handle Holyfield not running from him

Tyson was a GREAT fighter and to me only truly great fighters who were mentally stronger than him would beat him

I would never, and I certainly havent seen the "hating" broadwayjoe do it, pick anyone to beat him that wasnt an absolutley great fighter

Picking Ali, who was not only maybe the most physically tough and courageous heavyweight of all time as well as an absolute mastermind of combative psychology to defeat Tyson is completely sensible and I would think most observers would have the same view of that matchup

Its hateful to pick Tyson to lose to the generally accepted best Heavyweight ever? Thats crazy talk

 

N Terms of MENTAL WarFare, Ali Would have Mike Tyson N his Back Pocket...As for the Mythical Matchup, the Most LOGICAL Conclusion is Ali UD 12 or UD 15...

A TRUE FACT about Tyson is that his Level of Performance DETERIORATED, as his Bouts Progressed...Even a YOUNG Tyson...The Tillis, Ribalta, Ruddock II and Bonecrusher Fights Illustrated this...

Mike was HELL Early & Up til about the 6th or 7th Round...After that, there was Generally a SIGNIFICANT Drop-Off...Another FACT is that Ali WOULD Take Tyson to the LATTER Rounds...His JAB, CHIN & FOOTWORK Pretty Much ASSURES Such...


REED:hammert:

 

Holyfield was active during the time Tyson was locked up, and Tyson's timing and accuracy went to shit in the time he was away. That was very evident in his fights back.

You can talk about him like he was the same fighter, mentally or physically, if you want, but I don't accept that premise.

 

Holyfield had recently lost his title to Michael Moorer and been ko'd by Riddick bowe, doesnt that count for anything?

and the fact remains, he was the best fighter Tyson had faced

 

Well, I don't know that I'd characterize the (narrow) majority decision loss to Moorer as recent...more recently than that he'd knocked down Mercer and very nearly knocked Bowe out.

There's plenty of ways to spin things, but none of them get around the fact that Tyson was out of the ring for four years during his prime and when he came back he was merely a facsimilie of the fighter he was.

 

and none of them get around the fact that holyfield was far and away the best fighter he ever faced

 

I certainly disagree that statement.

 

who was better???

 

This doesn't go to the point of the discussion, but Lennox Lewis.

And Lewis wasn't plagued by steroid/HGH rumors that surrounded Holyfield for years.

 

well I wasnt even going to bring up Lewis, I was giving Tyson a pass for that because he was clearly no longer much of a fighter at that point

before Holyfield, what fighter did Tyson face that was even close to that good and tough?

 

How good and tough was Holyfield before he "bulked" up?

He came close to geting knocked out by Bert Cooper, and Riddick Bowe, and made a fight with George Foreman a struggle.