|
|
|
#16 |
|
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 12,499
vCash: 1000 |
I don't have anything on paper, but there was small talk going around here and there during the late 80's and early 90's, that Tim Witherspoon was the one fighter that the Tyson camp wanted nothing to do with. That of course, does not mean jack in the grand scheme of things however. I myself think that Mike Tyson - being the superior fighter and fairing much better against many of the same foes as Witherspoon, would win. A well trained and motivated Tim Witherspoon would be a challenge worth taking seriously though. He had balls, chin, heart, size, power and an awkward style that a lot of camps didn't like, and Tyson's was no exception. I don't see this as an easy match for Mike by any means, but I am confident that he'd win in one way or another.
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
NSB defector
ESB Addict
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,611
vCash: 500 |
Quote:
when you say ''had Spoon beaten Smith, it would have been a 50/50 affair. Knowing what I know though I'm gonna say mike knocks him out early'', you totally disregard the fact that Spoon dominated Smith once in 1985 and that without the upset loss in the second half of 1986 (let's say Spoon fights Tyson after Bruno), Spoon would have been coming into the Tyson fight with 7 consecutive wins, one of which being over Smith, your own criteria to call Tyson-Spoon a 50/50 affair |
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,709
vCash: 330 |
Quote:
Had spoon not been knocked out by smith I think a unification fight with Tyson would have been seen as 50/50. however that didn't happen. He did get knocked out by smith and consequently I think Tyson knocks spoon out. |
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
NSB defector
ESB Addict
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,611
vCash: 500 |
Quote:
![]() as for the KO loss, it is the result of the dumb WBA 3 KD rule, Spoon never looked like he could not possibly survive, who knows what would have happened without the rule (keeping in mind Spoon had already dominated Smith and how you can turn back the tide like Marquez did after a disastrous 1st round) |
|
|
|
|
#23 | |
|
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,709
vCash: 330 |
Quote:
I think it would have been seen as 50/50 but with hindsight I pick Tyson by ko. |
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 12,499
vCash: 1000 |
Quote:
I can't use witherspoon's loss to Smith a gauge for much of anything. That fight reeked of a dive and the more I read or hear about it, the more I'm inclined to believing such. Furthermore, I don't buy into the concept that if fighter A beats fighter B and B goes onto beating C, then A most definitely beat C as well. Boxing doesn't work that way. In either case, I agree that Tyson should be favored over Witherspoon, but not for the same reasons you're going by. |
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|