How Does Tony Tucker Match Up, With The Other Alphabet Guys?

Yes I am. Names sir, which should be easy for you since you can name " a couple a 100 " better. I'm pretty well read and think you are reaching to make a point. Come up with your list. Without sounding condeseding I'd like to see it. Tucker is has done enough to rate top 200. I stand on that.

 

It’s a pointless waste of time. I give you 100 names, you pick one and say ‘well I think Tucker’s better than him’ Then maybe we go back and forth for an hour or two on the merits of Tucker vs. that guy. Then you say, ‘well OK here’s another.’ Rinse, repeat.

So I waste time putting together any list whatsoever and you reject it.

So how about we do it this way:

You say he’s top 50. Give me your list of 50 that includes Tucker and I give you a name to replace him who is better. Both of us waste less time.

 

Tucker (I've posted this before) was good but not great. That knee injury sucked and stalled him a bit, but he was rather carefully matched up until Douglas (a fight which he was losing before stopping Douglas). The Norris and McCall wins were (just going by memory) close decisions. He also developed a drug problem after the Tyson fight which did him no favors.

I wish they threw him in sooner against better competition as he did have the tools to be competitive or win against the other contenders of the 80s before he got to Tyson(Tubbs, Page, Coetzee, Berbick). Also I think he went into the Tyson fight with that injured hand and he ended up re-injuring or just making that injury worse.

 

No you said hundreds. I say BS name them, then your retreat and aks me for 50. What happened to hundreds? I said he arguably top 100. How do you know what I will agree with? If you have access to lists this deep, go ahead and name them. Fair enough?

 

Here’s where you opened the door by claiming he has a top 50 resume. So you first.

So if I give you a list of 100 heavyweights, convince me that it’s not going to go exactly the way I said it was — that you’ll just pick a name off that list and say ‘well you didn’t do it because I say Tucker is better than this guy.’

Give me your 50 and assurance that if I post a list of 100 (your first ask) or even 200 (your second) that you’ll say ‘OK I’m satisfied’ then maybe I’ll make that time investment.

Start with your 50.

 

So you adimt you claim that you can name 100's with a better resume is bunk? Very few fighter have wins over two lineal champions. I could probably name 40 better resumes, but not 100's . We are going on career wins, or fighter fought?

I'll start with Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Jeffries, Langford, Johnson, Dempsey, Wills, Louis, Schmeling, Charles,Marciano, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis, W Klitschko having better resumues at heavyweight! Better wins. 19 men, okay now your 100.

 

Without making specific comparisons I think he’d win some and lose some. Lame answer I know but aside from Tim Witherspoon and maybe Mike Weaver I don’t see a vast difference in ability between most of the WBA/WBC holders between 1979-1987. Tony tucker primed at a reasonable age. He was a slim and fit 6’5” 225 lbs at his best and had decent power, durability and mobility. His win list was admittedly thin on quality and didn’t fight too aggressive. But I think he had enough to match a lot of the top 80s guys.

 

I don’t admit I cannot.

I am not going to spend the time it would take to do it knowing it’s a senseless exercise.

You said Tucker is among the top 50. Produce your 50, him included.

Then, as I asked, assure me that if I produce 100 you’re not going to play some silly game of ‘well he’s better than so-and-so’ and pick one out. Because that’s a game you want to play and I don’t have time to play games.

 

Tucker sure looked like crap when he was older and faced the reflexes of Hide. Never saw Bugner sink that low. And it wasn't as if Tucker had to absorb a ton of punishment in his fights---Bugner was much better in the attrition department.

 

Okay, the game ends here. For the record I never said he's in the top 50, only that you'd be hard pressed to name 50 better. You didn't. Let's set the record staight. The I can name 100's better comment by you has been withdrawn as it should be.

 

No it hasn’t. I can but I’m not going to spend time on a senseless exercise.

Just like you’re not going to list a top 50 with Tucker in it.

 

You have me wrong, I never said he is top he;s in the top 50! This game was strated by you, not I. For someone who claimed as you do, you quickly walk it back. I was hoping to see your top 50/100. With all this game and time spent you could have come up with it.