v2 G.O.A.T Round 1 Group 9

First topic message reminder :

A very rare runaway winner in yesterday’s group, Tennis supremo Roger Federer romped home with 59% of the total vote despite being up against arguably the greatest golfer of all time Tiger Woods. Tiger does progress into round two in second place, narrowly beating Haile Gebreselassie by just three votes, who along with snooker champion Steve Davis leaves the competition at the first stage.

Today’s group sees Swimming, Boxing, Baseball and Rugby, compete for your votes.

We have the three participants championed today with articles written by forum members, so please feel free to submit your own argument below for the one not championed.

Please vote for the competitor you believe has achieved the most in sport and should progress into the next round.
Please leave a comment as to why you voted

Michael Phelps- Swimming- Championed by 88chris05

There probably aren't enough superlatives in a dictionary to fully explain the greatness of Michael Phelps, or just how much he's achieved in his professional swimming career. I'll make my agenda clear early on - if Phelps doesn't make it to the advanced stages (let's just say, last eight or better) of this process, then I honestly would consider it a v2 travesty. If anyone reading this isn't a great fan of swimming, then don't fret - you don't need to be in order to gain an understanding of some sort of Phelps' accomplishments, as they're so glaring and awe-inspiring. So I'll do my best to give a reasonable explanation of them here.

Unless you paid absolutely no attention to the London 2012 Olympic Games, you'll know that, during the Games, Phelps became the most decorated Olympian of all time, with his London haul of four gold and two silver medals bringing his overall tally to twenty-two (a staggering eighteen gold, two silver and two bronze, spanning the Athens Games of 2004, the Beijing Games of 2008 and last year's London edition). This would be a damn good time for me to dispel and irksome myth, namely this idea I've seen thrown about that Phelps only became the most decorated Olympian of them all because there are "loads of medals in swimming" and / or because "it's easy to win them in that sport." First off, as I'll explain a little further down, there's nothing remotely easy about swimming and secondly, you'll find that, of the top ten most prolific Olympic medal winners in history, Phelps is the only swimmer amongst them. It should also be noted that Phelps is the owner of eleven individual golds in the Olympics (thirteen individual medals of all colours), more than any other man or woman in history - once again, this serves to dim the off-base talk suggesting that relay medals have given an over-inflated view of Phelps' achievements.

On top of that, there's thirty-four World Championship medals (a record), twenty-six of them being gold (a record), seven 'World Swimmer of the Year' titles (a record), a world record set at the tender age of fifteen years and nine months (a record), thirty-nine world records in all (a record), as well as becoming, in 2008, the only swimmer ever to win the coveted 'Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year' award.

Some CV: some athlete.

However, those numbers alone still can't fully convey how utterly dominant Phelps has been within his field, and nor can they give full context to his brilliance.

To me, even more than his medal collection, what sets Phelps apart is his unbelievable desire to test himself and take on new challengers, no matter how daunting they may be. By 2004, Phelps had already established himself as the most complete and best all-round swimmer on the planet at that time, with four gold medals and two silvers at the previous year's World Championships. By now, Phelps had established himself as being completely dominant in the 200m individual medley, 400m individual medley and also the 200m backstroke, and held the world record in all of these events. He was also the silver medal winner in the 100m butterfly. Let's remember here, before we get too far in, that all but a very select few swimmers spend their whole career concentrating and excelling in just one specialist event.

These were the events he'd been training for and participating in all of his career thus far, and it would have been easy for him to have stayed within these confines (although it was already one hell of a hectic schedule!) and remain undefeated throughout the 2004 Olympics. However, Phelps wanted to try and do the impossible; eclipse Mark Spitz's feat of seven golds in one Games in the 1972 Munich Olympics, and to do that meant adding the 200m freestyle to his schedule.

In that event, Phelps had to settle for a bronze medal, trailing in behind Australian legend Ian Thorpe and also Holland's Pieter Van Den Hoogenband. But the point is, a bronze in the 200m freestyle was still a remarkable feat - Thorpe and Van Den Hoogenband were the two preeminent freestylers of that era, and also the two fastest ever over that distance. Phelps, in comparison, had never even taken a stab at that discipline before Athens. It's worth noting that, after Phelps had dominated him at the 200m individual medley event at the 2003 World Championships, Thorpe never ventured in to one of Phelps' signature events again. However, the nineteen year old Phelps vowed to carry on until he became the world's best freestyler, to go along with being the world's best in the butterfly and medleys. Keep in mind that, at the time, most observers felt that this was a truly unreachable goal. Nevertheless, Phelps was the most successful athlete of the Games, narrowly falling short of Spitz's seven golds but still scooping up six golds (four of which came in individual events, equalling Spitz in that regard) and two bronzes.

His dominance in the butterly and medleys assured (he completed the 100m-200m double and the 200m-400m double in those events respectively in Athens), Phelps, good to his word, then set his sights on Thorpe's 200m freestyle world record (thought to be the best record in men's swimming at the time) of 1 minute 44.06 seconds, edging it out at the 2007 World Championships with a 1 minute 43.86 and then totally dismantling it with a 1 minute 42.96 clocking in winning the 200m freestyle gold at the 2008 Beijing Games.

I mean seriously, come on - he's not even meant to be a freestyler!

Almost as a bit of fun, Phelps even tried his hand at the backstroke in 2006, an event in which he was even less experienced and trained in than the freestyle. At the Pan Pacific championships that year, he won the silver medal in the 200m backstroke event. It was the only time he ever competed in backstroke at a major championship but, a year later, he showed his hand when he gave the discipline another whirl at the US Nationals; incredibly, he clocked the third fastest time ever recorded in the 200m backstroke, and went one better in the 100m, coming up with the second best time ever, just 0.03 seconds off the world record for the event. That a part-time (at best) backstroker could, almost at the drop of a hat, produce such performances in his weakest event, all while dominating the butterfly, medleys and freestyle (2007 had been the year in which Phelps scooped seven golds in seven events at the World Championships, lest we forget) is way beyond remarkable. I don't think there are sufficient words for it, in fact.

And then, of course, came the most successful Olympic campaign ever in Beijing in 2008, as Phelps took eight gold medals in eight events (seven of them in world record time, the other 'only' an Olympic record), eclipsing Spitz's aforementioned seven. His five individual golds at the meet (400m individual medley, 200m freestyle, 200m butterfly, 200m individual medley and 100m butterfly) also equaled the record for the most individual golds won in a single Olympics.

After the Games, a debate raged on about who was the stand out performer and / or biggest star of the Beijing Olympics - Phelps, or the incredible Jamaican track star Usain Bolt, who set world records in winning gold in the 100m, 200m and 4x100m sprints. Well, due to track and field's popularity and his telegenic personality (a contrast to the quiet, reserved Phelps), Bolt was the star of Beijing. But was he the greatest performer of the Games, as many claimed? Absolutely not. Phelps was. The variety of his schedule is scary. Ian Thorpe won nine Olympic medals, which is fantastic, of course. But all of them were in freestyle. Phelps' medals came in freestyle, butterfly and medley - to even compare, I honestly think that Bolt would have needed to add long jump to his arsenal and won the gold in that event, and / or perhaps a longer sprint such as the 400m.

After the eight golds of Beijing it was, naturally, impossible for Phelps to go beyond what he'd already done, however the medals continued to flow right up until his retirement after London 2012; five golds and one silver at the 2009 World Championships, four golds, two silvers and one bronze at the 2011 World Championships and then, to put the seal on his career, those four golds and two silvers in London.

Not only does Phelps boast unrivalled diversity and variety in the pool, then, but he also has insane fitness and unbelievable longevity to bolster his claim of being the greatest sportsperson of them all.

Take his Beijing feats, for example; to collect his eight gold medals, Phelps had to complete seventeen races in one week, what with the qualification rounds before the finals. While he was doing this across the past three Olympics, he often had rivals awaiting him near the end of the week - rivals who competed in just one specialty event and, having nothing like the work load of Phelps, would have been rubbing their hands together watching him fatigue himself. Milorad Cavic, a world champion over the 50m butterfly (and a former world record holder over the 100m distance) was awaiting Phelps in the 100m butterfy final in Beijing. How much fresher and less fatigued he must have been than Phelps at that stage was staggering - he'd dropped the 200m butterfly in order to maximise his chances of upsetting Phelps over the shorter course, and Phelps had already collected six gold medals that week. And yet, Phelps was still able to claim the gold in what was, without doubt, the greatest race I've ever seen in the pool.

Once more, to consistently be able to race across so many different disciplines for a week and then, at the end of it, be able to beat world-class specialists at their best event and after they've basically spent a week resting in comparison is a true mark of Phelps' ridiculous talent, and also his wonderful winning mentality.

What's more, swimming is a hard sport to stay at the top of, and seldom do its top practicioners produce anything like their best after their mid twenties. Before Phelps came along, no man in history had ever managed to win the same event at three successive Olympics in the pool, and many observers were wondering if the 'threepeat' was indeed possible at all, given how short a swimmer's peak is. Step forward Mr. Phelps, who made history at London 2012 by becoming the first man ever to do this, taking gold in the 200m individual medley (ahead of his great rival Ryan Lochte) to go along with the golds he took in that same event in 2004 and 2008. Not content with making history once, less than twenty-four hours later he was at it again, winning the final of the 100m butterfly (the last individual race of his career), turning a never done before threepeat in to a double threepeat.

Typical Phelps, really - nobody ever did it, and then he goes and does it twice at the same Olympics! It's just an outrageously fabulous achievement. And, for the third successive Olympics, Phelps took home more medals than any other athlete of the Games, regardless of discipline.

There have been some great all-rounders in sport; Gary Sobers in cricket, Frank Riijkaard in football - but none of them have been as complete across so many areas as Michael Phelps has been. If you wanted to be pedantic, then you could argue that Phelps lacks Usain Bolt's irrepressible star quality, or that he's not at the centre of the dreams of the world's youngsters the way that Lionel Messi is. But swimming is a sport which has grown immensely in participation levels, both amatuer and professional, in the past two decades, as well as being a truly demanding and punishing one in which incredible focus, dedication and a great deal of God-given talent are all neccessities. And Michael Phelps has been, to put it mildly, the Don Bradman of swimming. In many ways, in fact, you could argue that the 'Baltimore Bullett' has dominated his own field to an even greater extent than Bradman dominated his.

Not the greatest sporting personality, but as a sportsman in the purest form, and a true freak of nature, Phelps simply must be amongst the very, very elite of all time. Despite the length of this article, I still don't think I've done him full justice - that's how highly I think of Michael Phelps, unquestionably the greatest swimmer and most successful Olympian to ever walk the planet.

Mike Tyson- Boxing- Championed by Spaghetti-Hans

Prologue.

When the organizers of this prestigious competition came together around a mahogany table last May and put forward their list of candidates, there was one man of the top of every list that they almost dared not mention. He was a flash point; a ticking timebomb. They knew that he would have to be handled with care, lest he plunge the entire tournament into disrepute and infamy. It was decided that only one poster (or rather, collective of posters) had the ability to tackle such a subject. Having courted controversy even back in the days of Ye Olde 606, only Spaghetti Hans, aka The Main Event Lads, were capable of this task. We were approached by Tournament Director MtotheC with the simple question: Could we champion the unchampionable? Could we put forward the case for a man arrested 38 times by the age of 13; A man who served three years for r***; A man who chewed a rival’s ear in half. This is not a defence of those actions, nor should they ever be forgotten when casting your vote, but remember what this tournament asks of you dear voter. There it is, just above this article – ‘Please vote for the competitor you believe has achieved the most in sport.’ And ask yourself: Has anyone really achieved more, or competed more ferociously, than Iron Mike Tyson?
Tyson.

This is the story of a boy who was the best – almost instantly, no gradual maturation, just a fully-formed champion from the start – whose ferocious frightening aggression won him everything there was: The youngest champion at just 20 years of age; the first heavyweight to simultaneously hold the WBA, WBC, and IBF titles; and the only man to unify them. And yet whose same aggression would spiral spectacularly out of control and would ultimately cost him everything.

It’s difficult to accurately describe quite how incredible Tyson was a young boxer, and what an impact he made upon the sport. He was heavily-hyped, earmarked for greatness, his first professional fight drawing in fight fans from all four corners of America. They had come hearing rumours of his awesome potential. They knew that he was the reigning Junior Olympic Games Champion (having knocked one opponent out in 8 seconds flat), but that was about it. What they saw floored them all: A first round KO – soon to be a familiar sight. Commentators were astounded, noting how the kid had no time for the niceties of jabbing, instead focusing all his energies into devastating hooks to the head and body. His career began in whirlwind of early KO’s. Like a man in a hurry he began a ferocious rise to the top. His run of dominance – from newcomer to Heavyweight Champion in 18 months – was jaw-dropping. 15 wins in 1985, all by knock-out, were followed by 13 more the following year as Tyson scythed through the field – culminating in the second round knock-out of the man who ended Ali’s career, Trevor Berbick, and his first taste of championship gold.

Mid to Late 80s Tyson was nothing less than The Baddest Man on The Planet. Early recordings are an extraordinary document of his animalistic intensity – just watch Jesse Ferguson walk into a frenzied flurry of punches in Tyson’s first televised fight, or ‘Mumbling’ Marvis Frazier (son of Joe) drop to the floor like a puppet whose strings had been cut within 20 seconds of the bell. Joe convinced the officials to clock the fight at 30 seconds to spare Marvis’ blushes, but there was no shame in it - Tyson did it to everybody. Even greats like Frank Bruno and The Easton Assassin Larry Holmes were dispatched by Kid Dynamite. He was a human wind tunnel of self-belief and iron will, a perfect physical specimen schooled on the streets of Brooklyn, a master of the art of intimidation. Here was a teenager beating experienced opponents before the bell had even been rung. And his left and right hooks (ranked number one in ESPN’s hardest hitters) were sheer power on a level never before seen in a boxing ring. You can actually see it in the fighter’s glazed eyes after they’d tasted that first uppercut (if they were still standing): nobody had ever punched that hard. Sterling Benjamin described it as ‘a sledgehammer,’ and tried to have the Tyson Uppercut banned. Lawyers were called in to assess the dangers. As Sugar Ray Robinson commented in the aftermath of his devastating 91 second knock-out of then unbeaten Olympic Gold Medalist and Hall of Famer Michael Spinks in 1988: ‘He was so destructive he should be locked up.’ How prescient that would prove.



Tyson’s rise had been meteoric, an unstoppable force that stunned the boxing world. There was a genuine belief that he was unbeatable. The phrase repeated by all – from George Bush Sr. in an early phone call to Jerry Rice, to Smokin’ Steve Albert himself – was that ‘the only thing that can beat Mike Tyson is Mike Tyson himself.’ And indeed behind the iron curtain of Tyson’s public persona clouds were gathering, the thread was starting to tug. The death of his mentor, trainer, and father figure, Cus D’Amato in 1985 – in the midst of his ascent to the top – had an immeasurable impact on his life. D’Amato had plucked him from the streets as a feral youth, and recognizing his talent had taught him discipline both inside and outside the ring. Following his death, these lessons were ignored. Tyson became sloppy in the ring, the peak-a-boo defensive stance often forgotten in his hurry to finish his opponent off. It’s a testament to his awesome speed and power that he was able to compensate for this lack of craft and still dominate the division. But as Don King’s promise of millions turned him away from the team that had kept the fragile fighter on a steady course, out of ring distractions, an unravelling marriage, and ill-discipline, all took their toll. Tyson began to boil over.

All these factors brought an end to his half-decade of destruction, and made his shock 1990 defeat possible. The 42/1 longshot ‘Unbackable’ Buster Douglas, so unfancied even his own wife didn’t take up those generous odds, knocked the champion to the canvas for the very first time in his 38th professional fight. The Tokyo crowd sat open-mouthed in hushed disbelief, sushi littered the floor. Tyson himself spent precious seconds on the floor scrambling around searching for his mouthguard – so alien was it to him to be in this position he didn’t know quite what to do. It is widely regarded as the greatest upset in boxing history, and the lapse cost Tyson the chance to break Rocky Marciano’s record of 49 unbeaten fights – a record he had always seemed destined to achieve.

It was the beginning of the end for Tyson. He was still a hell of a fighter – his double bill of victories against the great Canadian hope, Razor Ruddock, a man Evander Holyfield had desperately dodged, stand amongst Tyson’s greatest wins. But by then he had self-destructed – Smokin’ Steve Albert’s prophesy come to pass. Incarcerated for r*** he wouldn’t set foot in a ring again until 1995. The Tyson who returned was a danger to himself and his opponents. He’d given up all pretence of defence – his gameplan was simply to uppercut until he took someone’s head off, or lost his own. His final ten years in the sport flew by in a haze of controversy. The intensity of old had lost all direction. He was, simply, feral. He briefly reclaimed his WBA and WBC titles, but also had to contend with disqualifications for cannabis use, crippling defeats in the only fights that mattered to Holyfield and Lewis, cries of cannibalism, assault charges, the stigma of being ‘The Most Hated Man in America’, and a final humbling loss to Irish journeyman, Kevin McBride.

But make no mistake, he was box-office. Nothing compared to the hype surrounding his long delayed bout with Holyfield. Tyson-Holyfield I is still the high water mark for sheer public sporting hysteria. ‘Finally’ we were seeing it. Las Vegas was at a stand-still – everybody on earth wanted to say they were there. The Main Event Lads remember standing on craps tables in the Bellagio craning to get a view on the big screens, watching in shock as The Real Deal proved he was so. Then 6 months later The Sound and The Fury of Tyson-Holyfield II was deafening – the shock of seeing Tyson tear his rival’s earlobe off made headlines the world over. With his licence suspended the outcast turned to the WWF. The Boss, Vince McMahon paying him $3m to be special guest enforcer at Wrestlemania in the belief that only he could keep The Rattlesnake Stone Cold Steve Austin in check. But the boxing public demanded the return of the man they loved to hate, and Lewis–Tyson (‘Is On’) in 2002 was Tyson’s last shot at the title. But for all his talk of eating Lewis’ children, Iron Mike had lost the hunger, and was resoundingly knocked out in the 8th. The public appetite for the fight was insatiable however, and shattered box office records once more. His skills had diminished, but make no mistake there was still no-one bigger than The Baddest Man in Sport.

Mike Tyson is simply the most iconic heavyweight since Ali. And until his reputation was irrevocably tarnished both in-ring and out, he had a strong argument to be called the greatest of all time. It is impossible to over empathize the impact he had in the 80’s. People had never seen (or felt) anything quite like it. His rage was irresistible. No-one had ever been so dominant. He changed the sport forever. Tyson once said that ‘I have to live at the top of the world or I have to live at the bottom of the ocean.’ The man did both, and for good and for evil, he transcended his sport, and captured the attention of the world. His demise directly led to the diminishing of the wider public’s interest in Heavyweight boxing, indeed arguably in boxing full stop, however hard Lewis and the Klitschkos tried to support it on their broad shoulders. They will be forgotten twenty, thirty years from now – Mike Tyson won’t be.

Jonah Lomu- Rugby- Championed by AucklandLaurie

"In the history of Rugby Union no other individual player has made the rugby World stop and watch in utter awe. In the history of Rugby Union no other player has made the rest of the sporting World stop and look at Rugby Union.
Born and raised in the tough South Auckland suburb of Otara. Jonah started his sporting life playing Rugby League for the Otara Scorpions. At the age of 14 standing at 1.9m tall and weighing 95 kilos he was bundled off to Wesley College where it was decided his future lay at lock. After a short period it was decided that it was a waste of talent so he was tried at No 8. But while all this was going Jonah wasn’t all that particularly interested in Rugby, this Polynesian kid with all the athletic talent in the World wanted to achieve his first love: athletics ... He wanted to go to the Olympics as a decathlete.
Upon leaving school he was taken to Hong Kong to play sevens for New Zealand; this was the first time the outside World saw Jonah. New Zealand won the tournament, and mostly through the staggering display of this new Kiwi, his ability to sidestep Sereve, or go around, away or through Campese had never been seen before.
At this stage Jonah was only weighing a little over 105 kilos but was running sub 11secs for the hundred metres in spikes and sub 12s in mouldeds on grass.
By 1994 he made the All Blacks and Jonah bought his power game to the 15 aside version of the game and showed the rest of his complete tool box of pace, step (both in and away), and acceleration that made him the most dominant player in World rugby - if none of those worked Jonah could also revert to absolutely smashing anyone that dared to stand in his way. He scored tries against every country he played against, apart from South Africa (but his team mates at fullback or on the right wing often did while the Saffas focused on Jonah).
In 1998 New Zealand, with a lot of assistance from Jonah won the gold medal at the Kuala Lumpa Commonwealth Games, some of Jonah’s fends in the final might have seen him sent off in modern rugby as being guilty of ""tip tackles"", his only saving grace would be that he had the ball under his other arm.
All in all Jonah scored nearly 200 tries in first class rugby, but it was the many other tries that his team mates scored as Jonah could attract at times up to 6 players and remove them from any defensive role, this made Jonah not only a valuable player but also a draw-card to International rugby and helped sell live TV feeds of international rugby around the globe.
Off the rugby field Jonah also was making an impact, sometimes with a lot of publicity and at other times not. Jonah was much in demand as a promotional sports talent for Television networks and sports apparel merchandisers, but Jonah never endorsed/promoted cigarettes, gambling or alcohol.

In 2001 he was contracted to adidas and formed part of their ""Be better"" global campaign alongside Ana Kournakova, David Beckham and Ato Bolden. Jonah had brought rugby into contention with the ""Big world sporting codes"", and by 2002 he had a Playstation game named after him.
Jonah also was representative on the World sage in another area, For many years now Jonah has been a member of ""Champions For Peace club"" wherein a number of elite athletes, members of royalty etc around the World commit through Sport to promote Peace by fundraising for Countries/Communities throughout the World that as a result of conflict lack social cohesion or are in extreme poverty.
Health:
In 1995 Jonah was diagnosed with a kidney disorder - Nephrofic syndrome. He received a kidney transplant in 2004. He carried his illness right through the peak of his playing career and we can only surmise what he could have achieved had he been fully fit.
Joannah Lumley or Jonah Lomu:
As I am writing this piece 10,000 miles away from most of you, I just thought I'd share a lighter hearted side of Jonah when he appeared on one of your own Television Sports shows.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd1hfFCYAzg
Even Daisy at the BBC now knows who Jonah Lomu is ...

Tyson is massively overrated and not in my top ten heavyweights, Phelps may have won the most Olympic medals but there are too many medals in swimming and I don't know much about Babe Ruth. Lomu gets my vote.

I must admit I struggle to understand the many Tyson haters on this site. You might not love the guy, and it's fair enough, but you cannot overlook the magnitude of his achievements in sport.

My questions to the Tyson detractors are the following:

- who had the most devastating power in boxe?

- who achieved most in the shortest time?

-who was the most feared?

- who unified the WBA, WBC, and IBF belts?

- and finally: who was the best fighter between Lewis, Holifield, Holmes, Douglas and Mike Tyson?

Duty281 wrote:Phelps may have won the most Olympic medals but there are too many medals in swimming.

Phelps' Olympic medal tally gives him no divine right to sail through this group, of course, but it does irk me ever so slightly when I see it discarded on the basis of there apparently being a lot more medals on offer in his sport.

As I said in the article, of the ten most prolific medal winners in Olympic history, only one of them is a swimmer - Phelps himself. Yes, more events were open to him, but the fact that he managed to triumph in all of them is still unbelievable. Lots of swimmers, theoretically, could have entered as many events and won as many medals if we take that simplistic view - but none of them have.

He has relay medals, yes, but Phelps' individual medal haul (which reads as eleven golds, one silver and one bronze) would still mark him out as a more decorated Olympian than any other man or woman in history.

Although he's ahead in the voting here (and on that basis you could probably tell me to shut up moaning!), I do still feel that Phelps, as a sporting icon, has been terribly underrated over the past deacde in direct comparison to the likes of Bolt, Woods, Messi and Federer. He more than deserves to be ranked amongst that kind of company and, for me, might just be the greatest of them all.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:I must admit I struggle to understand the many Tyson haters on this site. You might not love the guy, and it's fair enough, but you cannot overlook the magnitude of his achievements in sport.

My question to the Tyson detractors are the following:

- who had the most devastating power in boxe?

- who achieved most in the shortest time?

-who was the most feared?

- who unified the WBA, WBC, and IBF belts?

- and finally: who was the best fighter between Lewis, Holifield, Holmes, Douglas and Mike Tyson?

Apart from the unification bit (Which only existed from Tysons era onwards in any case) the rest would be up for debate. Holmes and Lewis are usually ranked above Tyson by credible boxing/sports publications.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:I must admit I struggle to understand the many Tyson haters on this site. You might not love the guy, and it's fair enough, but you cannot overlook the magnitude of his achievements in sport.

My questions to the Tyson detractors are the following:

- who had the most devastating power in boxe?

- who achieved most in the shortest time?

-who was the most feared?

- who unified the WBA, WBC, and IBF belts?

- and finally: who was the best fighter between Lewis, Holifield, Holmes, Douglas and Mike Tyson?

Why do you have to be a hater to not want to vote him through, cant you just be an objective sports fan ?
Re your questions most answers are just subjective, but I'd certainly have Holmes and Lewis ahead of Tyson and thats ignoring the likes of Louis and Ali and not even taking into account all the other fighters from different weight classes.
I we were simply talking top 64 iconic sporting figures he'd be right up there though........but we aren't.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:I must admit I struggle to understand the many Tyson haters on this site. You might not love the guy, and it's fair enough, but you cannot overlook the magnitude of his achievements in sport.

My questions to the Tyson detractors are the following:

- who had the most devastating power in boxe?

- who achieved most in the shortest time?

-who was the most feared?

- who unified the WBA, WBC, and IBF belts?

- and finally: who was the best fighter between Lewis, Holifield, Holmes, Douglas and Mike Tyson?

1) Tyson would be up there, but general consensus is that, in terms of sheer brute strength and power, both George Foreman and Earnie Shavers probably were harder hitters than Tyson. Foreman, in particular, has better demonstrations of that, his chilling demolition of the immesnely tough, hitherto unbeaten and peak Joe Frazier being the stand out and also returning the brutally KO the likes of Cooney and Moorer while in his forties. Who of any note was Tyson knocking out after the age of thirty?

2) Plenty have achieved more than Tyson in a shorter space of time and at a younger age. Not necessarily as a Heavyweight (which is a historically weak division in any case) but I could offer up the likes of Tony Canzoneri, Wilfred Benitez, Salvador Sanchez, Terry McGovern etc from other weight classes who all either cemented a legacy at a similar or even younger age than Tyson did and also did it in as short or an even shorter amount of time.

3) Tyson was immensely feared in his pomp. However, this makes him one of a few, not one of a kind. Joe Louis, Sonny Liston and George Foreman all won many fights "before the first bell" just as Tyson did. Moreover, Tyson wasn't the hardest to intimidate himself.

4) Again, unifying the three major titles makes Tyson one of a few, not one of a kind. In the days of a three (or more) belt system, the likes of Pernell Whitaker (Lightweight), Bernard Hopkins (Middleweight), Roy Jones Jr (Light-Heavyweight), Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko (both Heavyweight) etc have all unified titles.

5) Larry Holmes is, quite rightly, universally ranked above Mike Tyson in the all-time Heavyweight rankings by serious boxing fans and writers. Lewis is often cited as more or less on an equal footing in that regard, and let's not forget that a past his prime Holyfield embarrassed Tyson twice over - and that's not to mention that Evander had unified a good Cruiserweight division beforehand.

"direct comparison to the likes of Bolt, Woods, Messi and Federer. He more than deserves to be ranked amongst that kind of company"

can bolt run faster than a cheetah, can phelps swim faster than a sailfish?

no?

could tyson beat up a polar bear or how about a rhino..(dunno but I would pay to see it)

so how can they be the best...

but could anything or anyone beat woods or fed at there sports?



or forget all that and carry on some sensible talk

Chris

I'd certainly rate Phelps' achievements as superior to Messi's (to date) and Bolt's (again, to date), noting that Phelps has apparently reached the end of his career while Bolt in particular could still make big changes to his legacy by taking more titles and world records. He's in the same bracket as Federer, as quite well clear of the potential challengers in his sport, and in this being against serious international competition.

Direct comparison across different sports based on titles won is unfair, as swimmers do have the potential to win more events from the same basic conditioning and skill-set than do competitors in most other sports. Indeed, I find swimming a strange sport in that competitors can participate in multiple events during the course of a single session, sometimes producing world class times in different events separated by only an hour or less - suggests that the physical demands of each race are not all that high.

I'm also not a big fan of swimming as a spectator sport. However, having said that there is no doubt in my mind that Phelps is an extraordinary sportsman and deserves to be in contention deep into these GOAT discussions.

88Chris05 wrote:

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:I must admit I struggle to understand the many Tyson haters on this site. You might not love the guy, and it's fair enough, but you cannot overlook the magnitude of his achievements in sport.

My questions to the Tyson detractors are the following:

- who had the most devastating power in boxe?

- who achieved most in the shortest time?

-who was the most feared?

- who unified the WBA, WBC, and IBF belts?

- and finally: who was the best fighter between Lewis, Holifield, Holmes, Douglas and Mike Tyson?

1) Tyson would be up there, but general consensus is that, in terms of sheer brute strength and power, both George Foreman and Earnie Shavers probably were harder hitters than Tyson. Foreman, in particular, has better demonstrations of that, his chilling demolition of the immesnely tough, hitherto unbeaten and peak Joe Frazier being the stand out and also returning the brutally KO the likes of Cooney and Moorer while in his forties. Who of any note was Tyson knocking out after the age of thirty?

2) Plenty have achieved more than Tyson in a shorter space of time and at a younger age. Not necessarily as a Heavyweight (which is a historically weak division in any case) but I could offer up the likes of Tony Canzoneri, Wilfred Benitez, Salvador Sanchez, Terry McGovern etc from other weight classes who all either cemented a legacy at a similar or even younger age than Tyson did and also did it in as short or an even shorter amount of time.

3) Tyson was immensely feared in his pomp. However, this makes him one of a few, not one of a kind. Joe Louis, Sonny Liston and George Foreman all won many fights "before the first bell" just as Tyson did. Moreover, Tyson wasn't the hardest to intimidate himself.

4) Again, unifying the three major titles makes Tyson one of a few, not one of a kind. In the days of a three (or more) belt system, the likes of Pernell Whitaker (Lightweight), Bernard Hopkins (Middleweight), Roy Jones Jr (Light-Heavyweight), Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko (both Heavyweight) etc have all unified titles.

5) Larry Holmes is, quite rightly, universally ranked above Mike Tyson in the all-time Heavyweight rankings by serious boxing fans and writers. Lewis is often cited as more or less on an equal footing in that regard, and let's not forget that a past his prime Holyfield embarrassed Tyson twice over - and that's not to mention that Evander had unified a good Cruiserweight division beforehand.

Mah you might be right....in Tyson's time , when he was around demolishing boxing legends in the early rounds, people used to speak of him in completely different terms.....

not sure i get the argument that the heavyweight is the weakest clkass of boxing- its the only non handicapped division surely..

anyone can fight in it, whatever the weight- there is no maximum limit. ok there is a minimum limit- but i think we can forget about that for a bit..

Yeah i understand the boxing fans point of view that it may not be a competitive division and stuff and there are better pound for pound fighters- but for my money its all about who is the best.. surely that has to be a heavyweight

I think the heavyweights suffer from the lack of a huge talent pool. Most people walking around dont weight 15 stone plus, and if they do they arent usually that athletic.
Certainly through the years a higher class of boxer has come through the light, welter and middle weights IMO.

Of course they did, JK, but that was before he completely fell away at the age of twenty-three and before his shortcomings, be they physical or mental, were exposed. I wouldn't dispute at all that, when he was at that stage, people were predicting that he'd reach legendary status in the purest and most respectable sense. However, it's impossible to deny that, by hook or crook, that ended up being a false dawn and he never quite reached those heights.

As I said right near thestart of this thread, I don't have any issue with people giving extra weight to how much a sportsperson transcends their sport or attracts people to it, as long as there's some kind of balance there (ie, as long as they're actually amongst the greatest their sport has seen when all is said and done).

If you look at career accomplishments, level of opposition beaten, longevity, manner of defeats etc, all of which make up a career, then it's impossible to make Tyson one of the fifty greatest boxers ever across all divisions, and impossible to make him even a contender to be the best Heavyweight of the lot. And no amount of transcending can turn that situation in to one where he can realistically be amongst the greatest sportsmen ever, for me.

Has to be Phelps. The others aren't even close.

Don't know enough about Ruth, which is a shame.

Remember Tyson in his prime pretty well. Despite what so many are saying, for quite some time he was out on his own. I'm not sure anyone had seen anything like his handspeed, combined with the force of delivery, in the heavyweight division. He didn't maintain it though so no vote for him from me.

Lomu was excellent and he broke the mould for modern wingers. Despite his reputation for being a bulldozer, he had a hell of step off both feet. Still, not sure he'd win a vote for even rugby's G.O.A.T. (I'd have one or two of his AB team mates higher up my list) so I can't give it to him either.

88Chris05 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Phelps may have won the most Olympic medals but there are too many medals in swimming.

Phelps' Olympic medal tally gives him no divine right to sail through this group, of course, but it does irk me ever so slightly when I see it discarded on the basis of there apparently being a lot more medals on offer in his sport.

As I said in the article, of the ten most prolific medal winners in Olympic history, only one of them is a swimmer - Phelps himself. Yes, more events were open to him, but the fact that he managed to triumph in all of them is still unbelievable. Lots of swimmers, theoretically, could have entered as many events and won as many medals if we take that simplistic view - but none of them have.

He has relay medals, yes, but Phelps' individual medal haul (which reads as eleven golds, one silver and one bronze) would still mark him out as a more decorated Olympian than any other man or woman in history.

Although he's ahead in the voting here (and on that basis you could probably tell me to shut up moaning!), I do still feel that Phelps, as a sporting icon, has been terribly underrated over the past deacde in direct comparison to the likes of Bolt, Woods, Messi and Federer. He more than deserves to be ranked amongst that kind of company and, for me, might just be the greatest of them all.

I agree.

Forgetting the number of medals for a second, Phelps is the only ever male swimmer to win the same event in 3 consecutive olympic games. Many have tried (Popov in the sprint freestyle in 2000, Kitajima in the breaststroke in London) and fallen well short.

Phelps is clearly the best swimmer of all time, a sport present across all continents may I remind you. frankly I rank him comfortably above Woods and Bolt (for now).

@AucklandLaurie - would you care to add a dash of a video to Lomu write up (similar to the Tyson one)?

The Tyson-Holyfield incident does not endear me to Tyson, as does some of the character blemishes. In the boxing world, with my limited exposure, Sugar Ray, Ali, Corbett, et al spring to mind.

In the Swimming world, Spitz, Louganis and a bit further back, Weissmuller (Tarzan Kreegah Bundolo) make a shout to be considered. Phelps is perhaps a more public and recent memory.

Ruth also brings back Hank Aaron back to life. The current crop of tainted stars like McGwire, Bond and others force me to go back to more natural athletes, than manufactured ones. Rose (Pete's) scandals have been eulogised by Billy Joel very aptly.

Just my 2-pennies.

Our organization is, quite simply, collectively gobsmacked at the lack of recognition for The Baddest Man on The Planet - Mike Tyson.

Looking at it purely from a talent standpoint, Iron Mike is the greatest heavyweight boxer, and by extension the greatest boxer, of all-time. Every TME analyst whom we have tasked with delving into the Tyson-Ali barbershop debate has reached the same conclusion: Tyson would knock Ali out inside 3 rounds.

A lot of voters are allowing their morals to dictate their vote as opposed to the sporting credentials of the nominees. It has been said that Tyson's incarceration for r*** was a symptom of his 'never take no for an answer' attitude that made him such a feared opponent. Of course, we would never say that.

Spaghetti-Hans wrote:Our organization is, quite simply, collectively gobsmacked at the lack of recognition for The Baddest Man on The Planet - Mike Tyson.

Looking at it purely from a talent standpoint, Iron Mike is the greatest heavyweight boxer, and by extension the greatest boxer, of all-time. Every TME analyst whom we have tasked with delving into the Tyson-Ali barbershop debate has reached the same conclusion: Tyson would knock Ali out inside 3 rounds.

A lot of voters are allowing their morals to dictate their vote as opposed to the sporting credentials of the nominees. It has been said that Tyson's incarceration for r*** was a symptom of his 'never take no for an answer' attitude that made him such a feared opponent. Of course, we would never say that.

Yeah, but Ali's in no fit state to fight these days. Quick question - is Tysonkings a TME analyst and was he the only one you asked.

Spaghetti-Hans wrote:

A lot of voters are allowing their morals to dictate their vote as opposed to the sporting credentials of the nominees. It has been said that Tyson's incarceration for r*** was a symptom of his 'never take no for an answer' attitude that made him such a feared opponent. Of course, we would never say that.

Hans I have a decent way you can test this hypothesis. As many of the people (myself included) who have questioned Tyson's inclusion are boxing board regulars I suggest you post a thread on there asking for people's opinion on the best middleweight of all time. I personally guarantee you now one of the names who will finish in the top three or four will be Carlos Monzon. Once you have done this spend a little time on google reading about Monzon and then decide if boxing fans are allowing their personal morals to dictate how they judge a fighter.

Tyson takes Ali out inside 3 rounds, now that is quite hilarious and the greatest heavyweight of all time doesn't get beaten by Douglas, losing to Frazier is acceptable and also understandable. Tyson wouldn't be in my top ten heavyweights of all time so how he's up for consideration here is purely a popularity contest.

Tyson would not beat Ali. Ali was the best ever heavyweight. Tyson would be behind Ali and Lewis and it would be close between him, Foreman and Marciano. Tyson was basically a later version of George Foreman and Lewis beat him just like Ali beat Foreman which is why they are the two best.

Phelps is the best of the group. Lomu stood out so much becuse he was a pro against amateurs for the most part. He wouldnt have the same impact today.

Foreman and Tyson were in no way alike.

Tyson was the classic bully who could be bullied. Douglas literally turned the main into a schoolboy before our eyes, dismantled him bit by bit.
I'd have fancied a peak Holmes to do so even more emphatically, and Ali would have had a field day. Punchers chance for Tyson to be fair, that's about it.

Spaghetti-Hans wrote:Our organization is, quite simply, collectively gobsmacked at the lack of recognition for The Baddest Man on The Planet - Mike Tyson.

Looking at it purely from a talent standpoint, Iron Mike is the greatest heavyweight boxer, and by extension the greatest boxer, of all-time. Every TME analyst whom we have tasked with delving into the Tyson-Ali barbershop debate has reached the same conclusion: Tyson would knock Ali out inside 3 rounds.

Well then, to borrow a phrase from captain carrantuohil, your organizations knowledge of boxing can fit on the back of a stamp, with room left for the Lord's prayer next to it.

This is the negative impact of Tyson - the casual fans who suddenly become the voice of authority, the ridiculous hyperbole etc. Ggggrrrr....

You're like a broken record.

Aside from the intimidation factor they fought in completely different ways.

Spaghetti-Hans wrote:Our organization is, quite simply, collectively gobsmacked at the lack of recognition for The Baddest Man on The Planet - Mike Tyson.

Looking at it purely from a talent standpoint, Iron Mike is the greatest heavyweight boxer, and by extension the greatest boxer, of all-time. Every TME analyst whom we have tasked with delving into the Tyson-Ali barbershop debate has reached the same conclusion: Tyson would knock Ali out inside 3 rounds.

A lot of voters are allowing their morals to dictate their vote as opposed to the sporting credentials of the nominees. It has been said that Tyson's incarceration for r*** was a symptom of his 'never take no for an answer' attitude that made him such a feared opponent. Of course, we would never say that.

To be honest I was asked whether I'd like to champion Tyson and I couldn't do it. Based on his achievements, ability and career as a whole he has no right to be anywhere near this list. As has already been stated he doesn't belong in the HW top 10 and I could easily name 50 boxers better than him p4p.

Yes. Tyson would knock Ali out in 3 rounds. Malcolm Marshall would probably also have got Bradman out cheaply, Federer would thrash Borg, and Bolt would beat any previous sprinter. Doesn't necessarily mean that they're greater. Performances will get better in absolute terms over time - that's just a fact.

Babe Ruth for me. No question. The greatest to play the game.

I seriously doubt Tyson would stand a hope in hell of knocking Ali out in 3 rounds.

Can't believe 10 people have voted for Tyson on here. Maybe Gavin Hastings wasn't as left field as I thought.

Shelsey93 wrote:Yes. Tyson would knock Ali out in 3 rounds. Malcolm Marshall would probably also have got Bradman out cheaply, Federer would thrash Borg, and Bolt would beat any previous sprinter. Doesn't necessarily mean that they're greater. Performances will get better in absolute terms over time - that's just a fact.

Not a hope Tyson KO's Ali in 3. Ali fought some of the biggest punching HWs of all time, had a great chin and would frustrate Tyson with his speed and movement. I've never ever thought of it as a great fantasy match up as can see no way that Tyson can win.

True, modern athletes in most sports would beat their golden age equivalents. But I'd still bet money on Ali at his best wiping the floor with Tyson at his best. Tyson would have to land a punch first...

Also Ali beat big hitters like Tyson when he was way past his best and let them hit him.

Tyson would have knocked out nearly anybody walking on a ring in his heydays. That's just a fact plain and easy to understand.

Shelsey93 wrote:Yes. Tyson would knock Ali out in 3 rounds. Malcolm Marshall would probably also have got Bradman out cheaply, Federer would thrash Borg, and Bolt would beat any previous sprinter. Doesn't necessarily mean that they're greater. Performances will get better in absolute terms over time - that's just a fact.

That is nonsense look at the heavyweight champion now Klitschko. He is one of the worst ever champions. Are you saying he would beat Ali or Tyson because he came after?

Do you think David Haye would beat Lennox Lewis?

You obviously dont know boxing my friend.

Some would have said the same of Liston

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:Tyson would have knocked out nearly anybody walking on a ring in his heydays. That's just a fact plain and easy to understand.

Bonecrusher Smith would argue to the contrary.

No they weren't the same at all Gordy, you seem hung up on the fact they both had the intimidation but so did Liston but the three of them fought in different ways.

Jeremy Kyle, I can only assume that you know absolutely nothing about boxing.

Chris you have given someone that is claiming to be an organisation time of day! Other than that gents and ladies please listen to Chris and Rowley with regards to Tyson. As impressive as his early feats were he can not be classed anywhere near the top heavyweight in history so he can not win this round. This is by no manys slating him. This is about chosing betweenthe creme de la creme. I expect Ali to walk through though if he hasn't been I this already.

As much as I don't really care for Phelps my vote goes to him. His ability to achieve such success in such different swimming events is simply phenomenal. To carry on achieving in so many events is over worldly. And not many swimmers come along and bring the sport to the casual viewer.

ChequeredJersey wrote:True, modern athletes in most sports would beat their golden age equivalents. But I'd still bet money on Ali at his best wiping the floor with Tyson at his best. Tyson would have to land a punch first...

Without wishing to turn this into an old versus new debate boxing is not quite as simple as some other sports, modern fighters fight less, participation is globally down on what it once was, the obsession with unbeaten records has led to over cautious match making of prospects etc etc. Not saying old is better or vice versa but the debate is nowhere near as cut and dired in boxing as it is in some other sports.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:No they weren't the same at all Gordy, you seem hung up on the fact they both had the intimidation but so did Liston but the three of them fought in different ways.

Jeremy Kyle, I can only assume that you know absolutely nothing about boxing.

You can assume wathever you want I am not bothered. You are clearly just another one Tyson hater. I remember all of those great matches and the buzz surrounding them, people couldn't really believe at what they were seeing.

For me Tyson should be right up there on top of the 64, but THE real one, not the ludicrous one with all those snooker chaps.

Who were all these great fighters he was knocking out, he beat some pretty good ones but not a single great heavyweight at their best. Ali on the other hand beat 3 of them.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote: I remember all of those great matches and the buzz surrounding them, people couldn't really believe at what they were seeing.

Remember going to the pictures as a kid and watching a film called Inner Space with Martin Short and thinking it was the best film ever made, caught in on the telly a few weeks ago, it wasn't all that good.

What I find the most interesting thing in all this is how i've yet to see a regular poster on the boxing section sticking up for Tyson, says it all really and his inclusion has made a joke of this whole exercise.

Rowley wrote:

Jeremy_Kyle wrote: I remember all of those great matches and the buzz surrounding them, people couldn't really believe at what they were seeing.

Remember going to the pictures as a kid and watching a film called Inner Space with Martin Short and thinking it was the best film ever made, caught in on the telly a few weeks ago, it wasn't all that good.

Take that back!

Joe Dante films are awesome. And Meg Ryan was still hot back then! If you werent a admin I'd ban ya....

Would be shocking that haille g went out yesterday and Tyson went through ghosty. But I have faith in the voting. I think he will fall short.

Just to point out again, no one is hating on Tyson. He's just clearly not the goat

Tyson unified the belts, thing that was simply unthinkable before. That means he fought all the very best of his age. Among those Michael Spinx, unbeaten until then and a Larry Holmes.

Holmes was a shell of the man he was though. Please explain buster Douglas' victory then? Hardly a atg

There are countless undisputed heavyweight champions, Tyson was the first and he also wasn't the last. Spinks and an ageing Holmes were good but they weren't great. Not really Liston, Foreman or Frazier level are they.