Alexander Povetkin in the 1980's

Povetkin would 101% be the belt holder in the 80s.
Thomas, Dokes, Whiterspoon, Tucker, Smith, Coetzer, Berbick...
In 1988 peak Povetkin would beat both Holmes and Spinks, I'm not sure Povetkin could do it in 1985.
Tyson is a different story.
In 1988 imho Povetkin would have lost. In every other year ('85,'86,'87,'89) Povetkin would have at least a minimal chance to win.
For example, in 1987, in Tyson's win against Tucker, "cracks" appeared in the speedkills ideology.

 

I'm not sure he's more talented than your average 80s contender.

The one thing he has on most of them is consistency, I don't see him losing to guys like Bonecrusher or Berbick.

The more talented guys could beat him when at their best though, obviously Tyson and Holmes (pre Spinks)

 

Some of our assumptions about Povetkin here might involve the time machine rules where if a fighter goes back in time he won't become addicted to cocaine. He'll just fight at his best throughout the decade. But that's a big assumption. Because cocaine is very fun and tempting.

 

I think he probably beats Spinks, Berbick, Page, Coetzee and a couple others. I would make Holmes, Tyson and Witherspoon ( motivated ) favorites against him. There are some who would probably be 50/50.

 

The other question is whether the time machine is able to transport a decade worth of high-grade 2000s gear with him back in time, or if all those designer PEDs break down chemically and we have a non-Ivan Drago version who’s a lot less sturdy, not as solid and maybe has stamina problems.

Take the 1980s guys, transport them to Povetkin‘s era and replace their coke with gear and maybe they become monsters.

 

Povetkin doesn't really have the kind of record or demonstrable performances to confidently back him against many of the top guys of the '80s.

Anyone with a strong jab is causing him problems, right off the bat. Stick and movers even more so.

I wouldn't bet with any kind of conviction on Povetkin against the likes of Weaver, Coetzee, Berbick, Cooney, Dokes, Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Tubbs, Bruno, Tucker, or Douglas. At best, his odds against some of them are evens.

So, he can compete; he's just not a shoo-in against a lot of the higher-rated guys. He's going to have to work hard to establish and maintain a ranking amongst the Top-5, and take some lumps along the way.

He's not beating either Holmes or Tyson.

 

I think he had it in him to beat anybody in the 80s. I'm not convinced by the arguments that a good slippery boxer would be his kryptonite. He beat Byrd pretty convincingly as a young fighter and as an old fighter he gave Hunter all he could handle.

 

Your talking like he beat a prime Byrd which he didn't - he beat Byrd when Byrd was at the very end of his career.
Mike Hunter is nowhere close to a Witherspoon/ Page and never will be. He's literally a part time boxer.
You guys act like he beat up Anthony Joshua or Tyson Fury for that matter.

 

Sure Byrd was at the tail end but if you watch their fight he still had a lot left in the tank. Povetkin himself was not that experienced at the time. With Hunter we have the opposite case. Old Povetkin, young Hunter. I don't know why you are dumping on Hunter, he has an excellent record with some fairly useful wins, only 1 loss to Usyk.

 

Povetkin's one punch knockout of White is legendary.

 

I could hear a deep animal groan all the way from England as Aydamn's heart broke like grandma's vase meeting the grandchildren when Povetkin put both him and Whyte into a coma with 1 punch

 

I think he fits right in with the 80s titlists.

That works both ways; he's capable of beating any of them outside Tyson or Holmes, but if was fighting them all regularly he probably loses a few. He struggled with Huck on an off-night, and I don't think anyone is suggesting Huck would clean out the 80s division.

 

I had to check to see if it was as good as you are claiming

This content is protected

... yes it was!