agREED... Curse of the Heavyweight/1-Division ONLY Fighter...Dela was Able to Accomplish More and Build One of the BETTER Resumes in Modern Boxing History... But @ NO Point was Dela as Consistently DOMINANT as Tyson Was Pre-Prison... REED
Those two points are closely related though. Mike didn't dominate everyone he fought either. Many of those opponents weren't held in the same high regard before or after many of the guys on Oscar's resume. I don't feel like playing devil's advocate so i'll just say I think Tyson is better and greater but it's not some light year gap. I also believe it's futile to compare heavyweights to everyone else.
I think the fact that Tyson's dominant streak was so relatively brief hurts his legacy moreso than his inability to win titles at a higher weight. There are a number of one-division greats (including HWs) that I would rank over DLH all-time - Ali, Pep, Joe Louis, and Benny Leonard to name a few.
I think Mike has him beat in greatness, although the gap isn't as wide as Mike has him beat in quality. Oscar was never undisputed in any division, and at the head of the day, Mike has a true defining win in Spinks. Oscar hasn't have a defining win. Let me rephrase that, he doesn't have a CLEAR defining win. Most people feel he lost to Whitaker and Quartey, and everyone agrees he choked against Trinidad. Vargas, was never the same after Tito was done w/him. I think the fact that Mike has emphatic, blow out wins, and unified/dominated the division puts him over DLH in greatness. Quality wise, we all seem to be on the same page that Tyson was the better fighter. More talented, more skilled, and I would say Mike had a higher ring IQ.
Brief???...Tyson Made Like 8, 9 Title Defenses Over a 3 1/2 Year Span, in His Prime...& His Run of DOMINANCE Preceded Even That... There were Looooooooooooonger Reigns than Tyson's, Unquestionably, but His Wasn't Brief in REED's Opinion... REED
Yup. A 3-year reign of dominance is far from brief. Dominating a division over an extremely long period like a Louis, Duran, Monzon, is the exception of the sport, not the rule.
All heavyweights have a natural disadvantage in these kind of greatness debates against modern weight jumpers so I think dominance is important. De La Hoya never really dominated a weight class he competed in. He might have been the best in a number of weight classes from 135 to 154 but he never outright proved it. Tyson was completely dominant by 1988 after the Spinks win.
Oscar surely would have dominated 140 if he stayed there longer. (and could make the weight) Doing so however would have likely meant missing out the chance to fight all the great opponents at welter during the time. Some would also say he stayed at 140 deliberately to avoid them. Trinidad, Whitaker, Mosley and Quartey is quite a foursome and Oscar was the only guy to fight them all.
