Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Dogdeacon, post: 2956072, member: 1026"] Your frame of reference is also why we all like the band/music that was big when we first discovered music. Regardless of how good he was on the come, Tyson was done at 23. Those facts dictate flash in the pan, but he was good enough during his rise to merit mention amongst the greats. But true greatness must be sustained and the most you could say about Tyson is he could have been one of the greatest ever. Tyson himself doesn't cling to the mythology that his early fans still do. It is not about opponents (facing 'greats' is a strawman especially when you get to throw out 2 losses to Holyfield?!), its sheer number of fights and duration of career that is severely lacking. I don't see where 'dodged' has anything to do with any boxer historically, but it was Tyson's own damn fault that he didn't fight Holyfield earlier and Tyson's fans need to hold him accountable for the missed years and losing his edge while on top. Other fighter lost titles or years & still came back had superior careers. One of the things that makes boxing great is the underdog winning or coming off the deck or a regular comeback - Tyson was never able to do it and yet that preserves a myth that early Tyson was different and an all-timer. I think the greatest fighter I ever saw was Sugar Ray Leonard cuz I watched him as a kid win in the 76 Olympics and then watched his every fight on ABC. I'm not sure if my bias effects thinking he beat Marvin Hagler. Sugar Ray had multiple peaks and valleys and great fights over a long career. I don't think he was the greatest fighter ever (its Ali), but I enjoyed more fights of his than any other boxer. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach