Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
A question about Mike Tyson?
I'm not a fan of Mike but why do people always said Mike Tyson was "overrated"?
He defeated the undefeated Michael Spinks when he was 31 years old
He also defeated the "Great" Larry Holmes in a way that none of his fans could cry that it was a "robbery"(Spinks I & II)
I'm not saying that Mike Tyson was an all time great.I just think he deserved more credit to his professional boxing career achievements.
And If we're trying to downgrade Mike Tyson's resume by saying he fought "old,washed up fighters".Then the same can be said about Rocky Marciano and Larry Holmes.Archie Moore was anywhere between 39-40 years old in the fight,Jersey Joe Walcott was 39 years old,He beat a 37 year old Joe Louis who was fighting just to clear his tax debts.
As for fighting bums,Rocky Marciano also had his fair share of fighting bums.In fact,his first 38 fights were against unknown journeyman boxers such as Lee Savold (96-37-3) and Tiger Ted Lowry whose record were (58-48-9) in their first meeting.(Which many thought Marciano loss this fight) and Willis Applegate whose record were (11-14-2).
Larry Holmes had even WORSE(IMO) resume.Beating a 38 year old Muhammad Ali (who was not fighting back at all).Marvis Frazier who only had 13 professional fight,Carl Williams who had only 17 professional fights (which many though Holmes loss this fight,I might add) and Tim Witherspoon who had only 15 fights under his belt(which many thought he loss) and he did not rematch these decisions.
What I'm trying to say is why does old timers such as Holmes and Marciano ranks higher than Mike Tyson,when their achievements are not that much better than Mike?
@Stone:
Muhammad Ali also had no tune up fight before he face Larry Holmes,but somehow Larry Holmes (and his fans) always tries to claim credit for beating a 38 year old Ali by selling stories such as :"Holmes was outboxing Ali when he was Ali's sparring partner" just to get credit.(Ali always let his sparring partners come to him during sparring sessions,to work on his defense etc:Michael Dokes,Tim Witherspoon) Larry Holmes is pathetic.
Larry Holmes also never unify the heavyweight titles (at least Mike Tyson did unified the belts) to become the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world.In fact,he willingly throw away his WBC belt for the IBF heavyweight title,just to not face his mandatory challenger,Greg Page).
If Mike Tyson was scorned for ducking George Foreman,I'm left to wonder why Larry Holmes received less criticism for ducking Page,Coetzee and avoid giving his close fights(Carl Williams,Tim Witherspoon) and bad stoppages (Mike Weaver) a decent rematch a
3 Answers
- Anonymous9 years agoFavorite Answer
I think tyson gets underrated in this forum ok his peak wasn't as long as say joe louis but he did make nine defenses of his title in his first reign and anyone that was around to see tyson from before he won the title till beating razor ruddock twice has to admit he was an amazing fighter he had power ,speed and a great defense. like many prodigies ( tyson was the youngest heavy weight champ) their career's aren't long but burn bright for a short time .the tyson that destroyed spinks would of given any heavy weight that had ever lived trouble , people say he didn't punch as hard a foreman this may be true but tyson was so much faster than foreman and punched in combo's unlike any other heavy only holyfield comes close .his head movement made him very hard to hit , you shouldn't confuse the tyson that lost to lewis with the tyson that beat tyrell biggs .ali isn't called a bum because holmes and berbick beat him lennox lewis was ko'd twice by guys that wouldn't last 3 rounds with a young tyson but gets more respect than mike , in short a peak tyson was a top 5 heavy not as good as louis or ali or holmes but still a great fighter...........
- StoneLv 59 years ago
Mike Tyson is overrated and underrated at the same time.
Some guys, Tyson fans who are way worse than Pactards or Flomos, say he's the greatest heavyweight ever he'd beat Ali e.c.t. Which is bullshit, any decent boxing fan will tell you.
However the opposite, Tyson haters, say he was an overrated brawler. He never performed well against A-class competition, which in some cases is true. But do you hold the Marciano loss against Louis? The same thing can be said about Tyson's biggest loses, his prime ended quickly and he was never the same Tyson after prison or even as early as the Buster Douglas fight.
I can't agree with you that he should be given credit for beating Holmes, Holmes was an old man by then and had NO tune-up fights for Tyson. To go from easy living and overweight to fighting Mike Tyson is like suicide - and he got just that. It's my opinion anyway that a prime Larry Holmes would have beaten Tyson, or given a much better fight anyway.
I rank him high, among the top 10 greatest heavyweights, the lower end of the scale.
- ErikLv 49 years ago
It's so hard to say.
When he launched his onslaught, was the most dangerous boxer of all time? YES! Did he have the greatest KO ability of all time? Yes!
But could he last 12 rounds with any of the greats like Marciano or Ali? HELL NO!
He's top 3 of all time but he will never be regarded as the greatest even though he had the potential.
