Prime Tate was very good. Tucker was a lazy ass fighter with average power. Tate wins easily. Maybe by stoppage.
Worst thing that happened to Big John was winning the title, I'd pick Tate , before he won the belt. Tucker afterwards, People seem to forget he did beat Gerrie Coetzee.
I'm casting a vote for John Tate to take a decision barring any disasters. John was a better boxer while Tony was more of a survivor who didn't always box to win or impress. The only thing I'll give Tucker was better durability but given that Tony wasn't a particularly devastating puncher, I don't think Tate would be in terrible danger of getting KO'd..
Tucker had a great chin. Tate would likely outwork him but I can't see him stopping a prime Tucker. If anyone gets stopped in this matchup it's Tate.
I see Big John Tate winning this one by unanimous decision over Tony TNT Tucker. Tate is not fighting Mike Weaver here, and Tucker is not fighting Iron Mike Tyson. Tate would find his way inside of the long reach of Tony, and John would be the busier of the two, as he was in winning the WBA title on Oct 20 1979, defeating Gerri Goetzee. Tucker will make a fight of it, but just does not pack the mustard in big fights to get it done, except for his knockout of James Buster Douglas.
Two fighter who wasted their talent through lack of discipline outside the ring. Tate was winning in near shout out of Weaver before last min surge by Weaver. Tucker doesn't have the power or stamina to do the same. Tate pts.
tate had lack of discipline? I never heard that. I'd pick tat over tucker, both good boxers, tucker quicker. But Tate was funny, I thought not quick at all, but steady, very steady, and nonstop, well placed thudding punches. Great stamina. Weaver caught him with one, that's all. Berbick j kind of did, but as I remember it, he knocked him out with a shot behind the head, an illegal shot. Tate was very good. I think he beats everyone but Holmes in his time period. A shame what happened to him.