Has Mike Tyson become the most underrated HW ever?

As for some of your other points:
- I don't think Tyson was at his peak against Douglass. He had progressively been regressing inside and outside of the ring.
- I think Tyson recognized the threat they posed to him (he waited until he could cash in against Lewis).
- I don't think Evander beats Tyson 10 out of 10. I also think Evander's losses get glossed over when remembering his career. In a lot of ways he's the polar opposite of Tyson and gets the reverse Tyson treatment.[/quote] I think you make some good points, Gumby. I just happen not to agree with them. (a) Tyson was coming off of a 1st round KO of Carl Williams going into the Douglass fight. I don't know how much more impressive he can be than that. (b) Tyson waited until he could cash in against Lewis? Lewis was paid a 6 million dollar step aside fee for getting out of the way of the "Tyson - Seldon" farce. Lewis, the number one contender, was paid to shut up until Mike vacated the belt right after defeating Seldon. Then Lennox takes on McCall and wins the belt back. If they paid Lewis 6 mil for not fighting, I'd have to say this fight had at least as much financial potential as any fight on the market, only second to Tyson vs. Foreman, another fight Tyson refused to take. (c) Does Van beat Blacula 10 out of 10 times? I think so. He beat him two out of two. Arguments about fighters from different eras are interesting. The Holyfield - Tyson contest was settled and it was obvious as to who the best fighter was.

As I said, you've made some viable points, but I don't agree.