Skip to main content

Legacy Betrayed: The Monetization of Mike Tyson

On the night of November 15, 2024, boxing fans from around the globe had their eyes set on a long-awaited match featuring one of the all-time greatest boxers and one of the biggest names in sports: Mike Tyson. Known as “Iron Mike” and “The Baddest Man on the Planet”, Tyson is the youngest boxer ever to win a heavyweight title, but that was thirty-eight years ago, November 22nd, 1986, when Tyson was all of twenty years old.


As for the fifteenth of November, 2024, Iron Mike, now all of fifty-eight years, was scheduled to go toe-to-toe with “YouTube sensation” Jake Paul, 27, who’s made a “career” out of reckless antics and childish online videos and, as far as professional boxing goes, coaxing old fighters to come out of retirement. 


Despite all of the hype and anticipation in the lead-up to the match, one between old school and new school, one buoyed by nostalgia, conjuring up memories of a bygone era in sports, and capturing the imaginations of the many who witnessed Tyson in his prime and the countless others who know of his legend, the event left viewers not just underwhelmed but saddened by the spectacle of an old man, once the best at his craft, grossly unprepared and unfit to fight; most spectators and fans of the sport merely hoping to see flashes of vintage Mike Tyson, glimpses into the greatness that once graced the canvas. 


The event ultimately turned out to be one of the lousiest professional boxing matches ever aired on live television, and easily one of the most disappointing productions in all of professional sports, rivaling the likes of “The Last Hurrah!” of October 2, 1980, between “The Easton Assassin” and then-heavyweight champion Larry Holmes, 30, and “The Greatest” Muhammad Ali, 38, when Ali was already noticeably exhibiting signs of Parkinson’s syndrome. 


At fifty-eight years of age, Tyson was twenty years older than was Ali in “The Last Hurrah!” And, throughout the contest, Tyson reminded us of the fight none of us can ever win: the fight against Father Time. 


Throughout the fight, Tyson looked stiff and unconfident, a shell of his former glory. The boxing itself looked lethargic, uninspired, and at times didn’t even have the looks of a genuine fight. As a lifelong fan of the sport of boxing, I regret that I was right when I said ahead of the event that the fight wouldn’t be worth it on pay-per-view; fortunately it was essentially “free” to those with a Netflix subscription, or those inclined to use the accounts of family and friends.


In the end, Paul defeated Tyson via unanimous decision with the judges scoring the bout 80–72, 79–73 and 79–73 in favor of Paul. After witnessing the fight through the first few rounds, most of us spectators were just glad that Tyson remained on his feet until the final bell.


Notwithstanding the predictable effects of Father Time, there were various other clues portending Tyson’s defeat: not just his demeanor, the apprehension visible on his face, or his uncharacteristically-sheepish entrance into the ring, but certain words spoken in an interview with a young lady before the fight. 


For this author, one particular interview stood out ahead of the fight, perhaps foreshadowing the events to come: in some measure the sacrifice of legend and legacy for a handsome cash prize; the monetization of the Tyson name, and the exploitation of the hopes, nostalgia, and wishful thinking of his fans, for one final payout. The interview centered around one topic: the matter of ‘legacy’.


Faced with the question of what type of legacy the former heavyweight champion of the world would like to leave behind, Tyson had this to say:


“I don’t believe in the word ‘legacy’. I just think that’s another word for ego. ‘Legacy’ doesn’t mean anything; it’s just some word everybody grabbed onto.”


“It means absolutely nothing to me. I’m just passing through. I’m going to die and it’s going to be over. Who cares about legacy after that?”

 

“No, we’re nothing. We’re just dead. We’re dust. We’re absolutely nothing. Our legacy is nothing.”


Although I admire Tyson for many reasons, often for his thoughts, I think I may disagree with him on the subject of 'legacy' — and I fear that Tyson, in denying the value of legacy, may have just been justifying to himself what he knew was on the line in this fight, and just what he had to be willing to sacrifice for this payday, in a fight he may well have expected to lose. 


While legacy may appear disposable in the promise of riches, its value is in the unseen, the invisible and the intangible; its richness is beyond measure and beyond time. Legacy indeed means something, to the father, the grandfather, the leader and the mentor; it is a responsibility as much as it is an honor. It is a commitment as much as it is a higher calling.


Legacy and honor tend to go hand in hand, and it is our legacy, which carries on through the people we've touched, that calls forth our best efforts in this short time each of us has on this planet: a kind of accountability achievable only by the very idea that our memory survives us. 


The legacies of celebrities are a different matter altogether, often too nebulous, abstract and exaggerated to be worth much, to carry any practical value; and if that is indeed what Tyson is describing as 'legacy' (i.e. false idols), then I completely agree. As for the legacies of individuals, of men and of women, of mothers and of fathers, they influence the future, they influence what will be; they determine the shape and durability, the strength of the oak and the constitution of the family tree.

Comments

  1. Didn’t see the fight but it appears the legacy Tyson is more concerned with now is having some cash to leave behind. At the end of the day any sport is as much, or more imo, about conquering the demons within as it is vanquishing opponents. I read his biography and the dude is so beat up and rickety that I’m sure his pre fight comments alluded to that as much as anything. He has come light years in his journey as a human and even a spiritual being. The more important legacy seems to be going in the right direction (not that he could have gone much lower;). As awkward as the match seems to have been, I think his dominance as a boxer won’t be affected. Just dial up his KOs on YouTube and his “legacy” speaks volumes.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Trump Victorious in 2024 Presidential Election

As of this hour, former President and now President-elect Donald Trump has secured his second term as the forty-seventh President of the United States. Trump’s victory comes after winning key battleground states Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia.  As for the popular vote, Trump was victorious there as well, winning by a one-and-a-half-percent margin. Despite these results, it’s evident that there remains a significant social and political problem in the United States, where politically-motivated violence, social unrest, crime and general instability have become rampant over the years since the death of George Floyd.  However, I’d say the fact that it was even this close is ominous for the years ahead. This was as clear as it gets for an election, that the incumbents (both Biden and Harris) are wholly unfit for any office, that they present a real and present danger where they’re allowed within twelve thousand miles of a school zone, let alone any...

Failure by Design

In the case for liberty, there is certainly some tolerance for error or failure, as it is generally suffered by the individual and not brought upon anyone by design . Wherever anyone seeks to empower government, however, one must be reasonably certain of the designs, the logic and the costs, and he must be equally honest about the unknowns as with the foreseeable consequences; after all, there is no margin for error where those designs are administered by the barrel of a gun.  One must necessarily remember that government is a monopoly on force and coercion, that force and coercion serve together as the modifying distinction between government and enterprise. It is a kind of force and coercion not by spirit or intention of written law but in accordance with the letter and understanding of the enforcers in their own time, in their own limited judgment and impaired conscience. As opposed to a state of liberty, where mistakes, failures and crimes are unavoidable in the face of human f...

Artificial Intelligence

There will inevitably come a time, in the not-too-distant future, when the majority of people are likely to embrace artificial technology like ChatGPT as the gospel. They will be either unwilling or incapable as far as scrutinizing its responses Just as ChatGPT doesn’t know who specifically provides its inputs, just as it doesn’t know the extent of the credibility of those inputs, and just as it will never possess the skills of nuanced thinking, people will be hampered by the same limitations while being encouraged or predisposed to relying on its judgments. It’s unavoidable.   Authority figures have predisposed artificial technology like ChatGPT and will continue to predispose it through those inputs. They will continue to leverage it as a means to persuade and predispose people, as it is itself completely incapable of discretion and original thought.  People will rely on it to inform them of not only the laws of physics but the laws and measures written and enforced. Its fal...