With Iron Mike Tyson Turning 50 Recently – Where is He Ranked Among the Heavyweights?

By Ian “The Boxing Historian” Murphy

As boxing fans, we are so accustomed to seeing Mike Tyson as a young man in the prime of his life during his early championship run, yet the man turned fifty on June 30. Let that sink in for a moment: Mike Tyson is middle aged. Was it so long ago that he was the face of boxing while terrorizing the heavyweight division in the mid to late 1980s? Yes, it’s been that long. He won his first world title from Trevor Berbick almost thirty years ago. Even though a lot of time has passed since Mike Tyson ruled the boxing world, he remains a polarizing figure in the sport. Some feel at his best he was unbeatable while others feel he was a hard punching hype job.

Keeping all that in mind and in light of “Iron” Mike hitting the half century mark, let’s try to take an objective (seems impossible, but it can be done!) look at Tyson the fighter. Enough time has passed since his retirement to have a clearer look. So, how good (or not!) was Kid Dynamite?

First off, I try my best to be objective. It’s hard in this particular case because for one, I am native to NYC and grew up less than ten miles from where Tyson did, so there is that hometown perspective, if not bias. I didn’t grow up like Tyson did, but I have a common location with him. Second, I am in my mid-thirties, meaning that he was the face of boxing for much of my youth, so I have a place in my heart for the man. Despite my familiarity with his career and having that NYC connection, I feel that as a fighter, it’s very hard to accurately rate him. He did so many things right, but also had under-documented weaknesses. At his best, he was fantastic, yet his decline was so rapid it’s hard to ignore. Personally, I cannot rate him with that upper crust of truly great Heavyweights, because they had certain traits that separate them from good, but flawed fighters like Mike Tyson.

There is an element of mental toughness and resiliency that was present in fighters like Muhammad Ali, Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, Rocky Marciano, Larry Holmes and Joe Frazier and their fellow champions that was not displayed by Tyson. All those men had (at one point or another) dealt with serious adversity in the ring and overcame, often being dropped and hurt badly and coming back to win. Tyson never did that. He was in trouble versus Buster Douglas and got beat. He also got tested by Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis and lost. This is Tyson’s most glaring weakness.

On a more positive note, Tyson at his best poses a tough match for nearly any heavyweight. Physically he was a marvel, a big man with tremendous speed and he possessed a hard punch in both hands. He also started fast and overwhelmed his opponents with his sheer aggression and physicality. These traits would make it hard for slow starters like Rocky Marciano and Joe Frazier to deal with him. I love and respect both men, but the odds are against them. Both were tough, both could hit, and both likely would fall. This is not foregone conclusion, as we are dealing with true champions and legit all time great fighters, but these matchups favor Tyson, who could take advantage of their need to warm up in order to impose their wills upon him. I rank these men ahead of Tyson overall, but not if we are purely using head to head matchups as an indicator of greatness. Conversely, he’d have trouble with guys like Larry Holmes (Tyson beat an old and inactive Holmes in 1988), Muhammad Ali, and George Foreman. All these men had great chins and heart. All were mentally strong. Tyson had issues with guys big enough to handle his strength and rangy enough to mess with his ability to throw meaningful punches.

You wouldn’t think of normally putting Foreman in with slicksters like Ali and Holmes, but Big George knew his distance and would punish Tyson. One dream matchup for me personally would be Tyson throwing down with Jack Dempsey. So many parallels in style (Mike patterned much of his own style off of Jack’s) and approach. I feel it would be a short, exciting and brutal fight. Likely Dempsey gets dropped early and comes back to stop Tyson, who never was able to fight back and win once he couldn’t get his man early, and Dempsey could come back and come back hard. The question now must be asked: Where does Mike Tyson rank as a Heavyweight in the larger historical sense?

I’d personally have Tyson maybe in the top 15, as he did indeed have an impressive run as champion for a few years. He would be rated higher if he didn’t self-destruct and allow his once considerable skills to erode and fade. One thing that makes many fans overrate Tyson is his highlight reel. It’s very impressive, and shows many of the qualities that made him a good fighter: speed, good defense, great power, etc. Let’s take a few things into account, however. For instance, Tyson did this body of work against journeymen and good fighters, not against truly great opposition. His greatest knockouts (most of which came before he became champion) were during his ascent. His performances against Lorenzo Boyd, Jose Ribalta, Michael Johnson, and Marvis Frazier cannot be weighed with the same reverence of Muhammad Ali taking out George Foreman in Zaire, or Joe Frazier knocking down Ali in 1971.

Also, for the most part, the belt holders (Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker,etc) Tyson beat during his title reign were not disposed of in quite the same dominating manner. Yes, there were KOs and TKOs in that reign, and he also ran through Mike Spinks like a hot knife through butter. However, outside of Spinks and a 39 year old Larry Holmes, he did not finish his fights in the same dominating way. It’s akin to a great hitter in AAA feasting on other minor leaguers, but once they get to the Show, they come down to earth a bit and can’t duplicate the performance due to better competition. A .350 hitter in the minors is not hitting .350 in the majors. Food for thought: imagine if we had Marciano’s or Dempsey’s HL reel when they were feasting on lesser competition on the way up? I’d wager they would be just as impressive, especially Dempsey’s run (in 1918, he went 19-1-1, 16 KO’s) that preceded his title-winning fight against Jess Willard in 1919.

So how can we realistically and objectively rate Mike Tyson? Honestly, he’s underrated by those who think they are in the know like internet experts who are on whatever revisionist history kick that’s en vogue at a given moment. These naysayers have some merit to their criticisms, as whenever Tyson was truly tested, he failed, as shown in the Douglas, Holyfield, and Lewis fights. This is all true, as he appeared to check out mentally at times when he couldn’t impose his will right away and get his man out of there. To combat the seemingly automatic dismissal of Tyson, I’d like to point out that during his initial championship run (1986-1990) he fought every heavyweight of note and beat them convincingly.

Perhaps he didn’t always win via devastating KO, but he won those fights clearly, and his competition was not weak. It was not 1968-1975 level (insane when you think of all the quality HW’s active in that era), but far, far stronger than today. He was a dominant champion…for a while. His personal life interfered with his training, and after 1988 or so, he was winning as much on reputation as he was on ability.

What about those fans who insufferably parrot the slogan “prime Tyson beats everyone!”? They need to get their heads examined, because it simply isn’t true. Anyone can be beaten under a number of different circumstances and the age old boxing axiom of “styles make fights” is lost on these people. Tyson likely gets bested by most historically good boxer/punchers with a good enough chin to get them out of the early rounds. This includes Larry Holmes, Muhammad Ali, and Evander Holyfield, Joe Louis, as well as good contenders historically like Jimmy Young and Jimmy Ellis. He might even have trouble and get beaten by Vitali Klitschko, who was somewhat limited, but was huge, hard punching and had a thick beard. So…the verdict? He’s underrated by some, overrated by most, rated just right by only a few!

[si-contact-form form=’2′]