delete

He was a good amateur, but he didn't turn pro til 28/29.

 

I used the word mostly. If we can agree that he was better than in the first fight with Tarver, then he was somewhere between that version and the Clinton Woods version, which is pretty damn good.

 

Tarver. Better pro and amateur resume. There's nothing else to it. You could argue that Bowe was better at his peak and therefore greater, but I won't.

 

Bowe didn't do **** as a pro. He beat Holy twice and that's it. It speaks volumes that you're bringing up all these washed up guys who Bowe fought coming up. Bias for heavyweights and action fighters.

 

Tarver lost to Ernest Mateen now? Whose ass did you pull that out of?

Edit: Oh ****, Mateen ko1 was right before Tarver lost to Harding on boxrec, a loss he avenged against a fighter who was better than anyone Bowe beat except Holy. You're done here. Get out.

 

Tarver has the better win with Jones. That almost takes over anything Bowe did.

 

yeah dude, getting beaten into oblivion and then having your nuts crushed is the stuff legends are made of. And now you're leaving out the Jones win in your analogy? At worst, that's at good as the Holy win. Go to sleep now.

 

Tarver is an ATG.

 

I rate Bowe higher because he is a H2H monster in his division. But it's an interesting they have very similar careers resume wise, both their ATG 2-1 series wins aside have less than stellar resumes.

Unproven top level contenders

Harding 2-Golota - prime pretty good contenders, more notable for competitive losing efforts, Harding pushing Jones better than anyone bar Griffin perhaps and Harding ofcourse for his wins over Tarver and Griffin

Weaker Titlists

G Johnson/Woods/ R Johnson / Griffin/Green vs Dokes/Seldon/Thomas/Hide - difference been Tarver's titlists are generally nearer prime, although Bowe has prime contenders like Donald and Gonzalez

Less than elite performances:

Harding 1 - Tubbs - personally I had Tubbs winning this one and Harding obviously beat Tarver

Tarver has more past prime losses, where as Bowe quite the sport at 28, Bowe probably would have become a whipping boy in his 30s himself.

So resume wise it's close, but Bowe is just a higher level.

 

The problem with your reasoning is that Woods held a title, Johnson was highly regarded, and Reggie and Griffin were still world class fighters when Tarver fought them. Tarver won the light heavyweight title four times.

In contrast, Dokes and Thomas were finished by the time Bowe got to them, and neither Seldon nor Hide, two of the most pathetic heavyweight titlists ever, had even won a meaningful fight yet (well, Hide never did). The dropoff from the level of champion Reggie Johnson, Woods and Griffin reached to where Hide and Seldon were is huge.

Bowe would easily be a top ten heavyweight if he had the equivalent of Tarver's resume.

 

I will agree that Roy was in better shape for the rematch with Tarver. But he was a long way past his absolute peak, which in my opinion was 94/95, and he wasn't motivated for the Tarver fights. Like I said, the biggest mistake Roy ever made, was forcing Tarver and Harding into the eliminator. When Roy had left 175, he planned on having a stint at heavy, and he was desperate to get Tyson in the ring. He left his Ruiz weight on for a good few months, while Murad Muhammad tried to make the fight.

While that was happening, Tarver was baiting him at every opportunity. When it became apparent that the Tyson fight wasn't possible to make, he gave in and came back for Tarver. So you had an unbelievably motivated and pumped up Antonio Tarver, against a version of Roy that had to lose a lot of weight, and who wasn't motivated and mentally really up for the fight. If Tarver was that great he'd have beaten Roy the 1st time, and in my opinion there was certainly no robbery.

After the first fight, Roy was still looking to move back up to heavy for Tyson, but everyone wanted the rematch. Again Tarver was pumped with a point to prove, and again Roy had everything to lose and nothing to gain. A fit and motivated version of Roy fighting at 100% of his capabilities definitely would have beaten any version of Tarver in my opinion. I don't think he was even near to the Woods version, because the weight loss took a huge toll on his body, and he was motivated to the point of being giddy against Woods, because the signs from the Ruiz camp looked positive, so he was enjoying himself and thinking about going up to heavy. A fighters mind set plays a huge part in the outcome of a fight. So the Woods and Tarver versions of Roy were completely different, both physically and mentally.

Again, I give credit to Tarver for the punch, but he had his eyes closed, and he couldn't beat a weight drained version of Roy who'd dropped 25 pounds (around 14 of which was actual muscle) the first time around. Tarver was mentally and physically at 100% in Nov 2003, and Roy clearly wasn't. So again, if Tarver had've been that great he'd have won the first fight. Then if you look at the 3rd fight, Roy had been destroyed by Glen Johnson, he'd been out over a year, and he wasn't allowed a tune up. Again if Tarver had've been great he'd have knocked him out again.

I think Roy's demise made Tarver and Johnson appear better than they actually were. They were both in the right place at the right time. There's no way in my opinion, that either fighter would have beaten Roy, had he been at his best.

 

He's not.

He isn't knocking on the door of AT Greatness.

He's not even at the address.

He's somewhere down the street.

 

Looks like the options have changed.

I can now, in good conscience, vote.

 

6 pages for Antonio Tarver? On Classic?

[yt]l1dnqKGuezo[/yt]