Frank Tate. How Good Was He?

He was predicted to beat McCallum, strangely, in ring magazine. Like without question. Heck he was predicted to beat Nunn.

Olympic gold medalist. Very good jab, very good skills. Still quite young. Nice height. He had a lot going for him.

No shame losing to Lindell Holmes because Lindell was sheer quality and massively avoided through the 80s.

 

Going into 87 I thought Olajide would beat Hagler, Hearns and McCallum in the same night! So when he lost to Tate, I was really excited to see him against Sibson.


Sibson was seriously damaged goods, who got the fight on name value and yet he was pretty competitive for long periods against Tate, Frank was a big disappointment to me, and when he was stopped by Nunn I considered him a total write off.


But with over thirty years hindsight I was wrong. Tate was a very good fighter, just not a superstar level good. I think he would have beaten Roldan fairly easily, Graham would have found a way to lose to him, in I suspect, a horrible fight to watch.


He would have given McCallum trouble but lost; I think he might have had Barkley's number. He would have a great chance to edge Kalambay anywhere but in Italy and maybe Hearns reputation would have intimidated Tate into losing a fight he should win.

 

Olajide never impressed me. He seemed wooden and unnatural in the ring. Going life and death with Troy Darrell was a bad sign, I remember thinking at the time, when he was on the way up. Tate thrashing him that way was no huge surprise.

Tate was solid and fundamentally good, but lacked a certain spark, that extra gear the great ones need.

 

Olajide was meant to be the next star of boxing after Leonard. Michael Jackson lookalike etc. He had talent. Barkley put the fear of god in him though both before and during their much-hyped fight

 

Think he would lose to all you listed with the exception of Roldon which is 50/50

 

Had a lot of raw talent. Some of it realized. Probably didn’t reach his full potential but still a good career