RE: The boxing thread
June 10, 2012 at 5:01 pm
(This post was last modified: June 10, 2012 at 5:01 pm by Napoléon.)
(June 10, 2012 at 1:45 pm)jackman Wrote: nap: yeah, we're not gonna agree on that one. age doesn't matter, when realizing someone's career is dwindling. bernard hopkins was whipping tail into his mid 40s, but most boxers are considered over the hill at 32. don't forget, tyson was heavyweight champ of the world when he was 20. he'd been on top of the game long enough that his full dedication waned. lennox won his first title when he was 24, pretty impressive but he wasn't the prodigy that iron mike was. success whipped tyson's ass more than lennox could.
I'm not doubting tyson was an absolute animal, before his meltdown he was looking to be one of the best ever. But you have to look at their whole career in my opinion to consider them up there with the best. If they have half a career epic and the other half shit, then they're only half as good as they should have been.
Take nothing away from tyson though, in his prime, he was damn near untouchable.
Quote:stat: i'm going to have to say that pre-prison iron mike tyson is my g.o.a.t.
Ali would of smashed him
