Except guys that could fight. He's the boxing equivalent of Oregon's ***** ass football program. Beat up scrubs, get blown up when somebody gives resistance.
He beat the tomato cans that that D'amato, Jacobs, and Rooney, who were all piece of shit rip off artists set up for him. The bill finally came due. Tyson was never anything more than a piece of street trash that could hit a little bit. When someone smoked him, he was exposed as the worthless coward he was. He never even gave a competitive effort against a good fighter. The best guy he ever beat was best as a light heavy.
He never beat anything resembling a great fighter in his career. I used to respect your boxing comments. Now, I must look at them with a very wary eye.
He's Kimbo Slice with training. A brawler. I've seen plenty of Tyson fights, most of them the other guy had no chance, Tyson knew it, the gym rat knew it and so did everyone watching. When he fought guys who weren't afraid of him and knew all they had to do is use their length and exercise patience, he was toast. Had he beat someone worth a damn, I'd be inclined to give him some credit.
Amen. When the best guy you ever beat was Leon Spinks' little brother, it's hard to claim you are good, let alone great.
Are you advocating the narrative i previously addressed as being nonsense? I mean, are you actually suggesting that Buster Douglas would have ever beaten a Kevin Rooney (or Cus D'amato) trained Mike Tyson in a thousand tries?
Leon Spinks little brother is a HOF fighter. And, hat, are there any fighters you actually think are good? Or are all of them scrubs? Let's go through the fighters you think are scrubs Larry Holmes Mike Tyson Sugar Ray Leonard Manny Pacquaio And this off the top of my head. Who else is a scrub, hat? How about you advance an argument that Ali in 1966 was just a complete scrub. I can't wait to hear it. I mean, he only beat Sonny Liston, who was like Freddy Liston's little brother. He didn't beat anybody else. No really, I think you can do it. I think you can argue that the best fighter that's ever existed at his absolute prime was a scrub.
By this ridiculous rationale, the Ali of the 70s was better than the Ali of the 60s. And so please proceed.
Right, see above. I guess Ali of the 70s was better than Ali of the 60s because the former version beat better fighters. Please tell me all about that.
If D'amato, Jacobs, and Cayton were rip off artists, then what the hell was Don King? Cayton was sort of a [penis],* and it sucks that he had no real relationship with Tyson and couldn't keep him from going with King when Jacobs died, but he was very much not a rip off artist. He was a legit business man, and a straight shooter. He's a guy that Ali said was "one of the good guys". And Rooney was a POS? Rooney was just a former fighter a good trainer. Kevin Rooney was never even smart enough to be a POS. He just knew how to train Tyson. And regarding everything you said about Tyson, you just lose credibility when you say that. It's silly. It's the simpleton's Tyson narrative. ___________________________ *Jacobs was not a [penis], and did have a relationship with Tyson, and his passing is what really triggered Tyson going to King, which was his downfall as King made him fire Rooney
Sometimes it's safe to assume things in the world of sports. Such as.....had Michael Jordan not retired, the Bulls would have won 8 consecutive NBA titles. On the other hand, assuming that Mike Tyson would have kept his head on straight had this guy not died and this guy not been fired isn't.
Hello Mcfly. You're measuring Tyson by the number of greats he beat. You're saying that's the standard by which fighters should be judged. But if that's the question you're asking you end up with some ridiculous conclusions. Stuff that makes your argument look bad.
Your argument is that had Rooney not been fired and Cus not died that Tyson would have actually beat someone worth a shit. A massive assumption considering Tyson was a thug from birth. Take your argument out of fantasy land and what you think may have happened and look at what actually happened. And I'm not going to apologize for measuring a fighter by who he beats. It's kind of how the whole thing works.
In boxing it can't possibly be. Or be ready to deal with the consequence that, other than 80s middleweights and 70s heavyweights, every other fighter in history pretty much blows.
Not every fight can be against a great fighter, I understand that but at some point in your career you should beat someone that people consider great in order to be considered great yourself. It's okay to have a difference in opinion. You think Tyson was great, I don't. No big deal.
