I agree he'd not be 2nd, but I'd go further than top 10 and say top 5.

Maybe at his peak but I doubt it.

I just think his reputation was built off being fed loads of petrified stiffs by Don King.

Many people will point to Buster Douglas's victory over Tyson as the turning point but I believe it our own Frank Bruno who showed the vulnerability in Tyson's chin before Bruno retreated and got pummeled.

I just don't think Tyson would last even 2mins with the George Foreman that annihilated Frazier for example.

Plenty of fighters were paired with puddings at times, including the likes of Louis and Marciano. It's often the way boxers develop specific aspects of their style.

He quite probably wouldn't have lasted more than a few rounds with Foreman in his prime, but then who did? We'll never know though, and what you have to remember is that whilst as you say Tyson had his weakness exposed for others to exploit, Foreman quit as soon as Ali had shown everybody how it could be done. Maybe if he'd continued, 1or 2 others would have followed this up and he wouldn't still have such an aura of dominance for people to look back on.

For me, Ali is out on his own as number 1, and then you have a handful vying to be runners up, including Foreman, Louis, and Tyson. I really wish there was more footage of Jack Johnson too.

Fair points but I don't think we've ever seen Tyson in the trenches apart for when Holyfield smashed him all over the ring and the other contenders you've mentioned would not fold so easily which is why I think he's no more than top-ten.

1. every single world champion that has ever been are fed on fighters that are far less classy than them its fact. used to be known as "the bum of month club"

2. saying that foreman would beat tyson in 2mins is quite ridiculous tyson was far far quicker than foreman! foreman beat people that had no footwork and just stood infront of him going toe to toe

Not at all - Tyson gets hit by Foreman and it's lights out.

Tyson was waaay past his best by the time he fought Holyfield. We were talking about in his prime, otherwise it's an unfair comparison. It's hard to say whether the others would fold so easily. In the case of Louis, he never came up against anyone a dangerous as Tyson IMO (see cjb's reference to 'bum of the month club' - Louis and Marciano were probably the most criticised for this), and Foreman was also given plenty of fodder to plough through. Once he came up against someone who didn't crumple quickly in Ali, he had no idea what to do.

Yeah, I suppose it's as easy as that because it's not as if Tyson had a decent defensive style or anything.

Tyson and Foreman were both similar in that they were unbelievably strong over the first 6 rounds, but not really comfortable going much further. Neither or them were ever beaten in early rounds when at their best, so it's tough to say one would quickly overpower the other or even one would take it over the distance. Claiming Foreman in 2 minutes is just plain silly though IMO.

about 20 million each

Tyson is no way a top 10 heavyweight - top 15 maybe. People always talk about how good he was in his prime, but who did he beat in his prime? Spinks? A blown up light-heavyweight. Bruno - never an elite heavyweight. An Aincent Larry Holmes?

A prime tyson is possibly the most overrated fighter of all-time.

My top 10 heavyweights (in no order)

Joe Louis
Ali
Lewis
Holyfield
Holmes
Foreman
Fraizer
Dempsey
Tunney
Liston