Prime Mike Tyson v. PRIME Pinklon Thomas

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Unforgiven, Oct 19, 2010.



  1. RulesMakeItInteresting

    RulesMakeItInteresting Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,985
    10,167
    Mar 23, 2019
    Thomas gets stopped in 8 at the latest no matter what. He just wasn't that great a fighter, and I personally think Holmes didn't care to fight him for exactly that reason. He was way too inconsistent, lost to people he never should have. One of the many quintessentially paper champs of the 80s. Just my opinion, no offense to fans.
     
    Fergy and Stiches Yarn like this.
  2. JackSilver

    JackSilver Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,719
    4,471
    Jun 24, 2017
    What happened to Thomas? He went from maybe the best heavyweight in the world in 85 to being just another routine title defence for Tyson in 87. Was he back on the drugs cos he looked terrible before the Tyson fight. Not looking scared or anything like that but he just looked like a old homeless guy.
     
  3. Stiches Yarn

    Stiches Yarn Active Member Full Member

    1,219
    1,889
    Jan 2, 2021
    Love how the word "prime" (i am talking about pinklon's) has been written in capitals.
     
  4. Pepsi Dioxide

    Pepsi Dioxide Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,908
    6,151
    Oct 22, 2020
    I could be remembering this wrong, but in the preshow to Tyson Thomas they ask Pinky about his drug use and if he's back on them, his answer was something to the effect of "well, you can't prove that I'm doing them". I always found that to be a weird way to answer a question that should just be " No, I'm not"
     
  5. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    47,903
    34,359
    Apr 27, 2005

    Love ya man but i will address this.

    Holmes didn't fight him because he was actually too good/dangerous at a time when Larry was looking to take an easy road to 50-0 and cruise off into the sunset.

    If Larry didn't think him a great enough fighter to fight what was he doing fighting the likes of Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier and Bonecrusher? Thomas was miles and miles ahead of those guys and then some. Thomas beat an in shape Witherspoon much more impressively and with far less fuss than Larry did a year previously. He was considered the second best heavyweight in the world for a while and a genuine threat to a Holmes who was obviously fading. Guys like Bonecrusher and Bey landed big right hands on him and did far better than they would have a couple of years prior. He was vulnerable and this showed when he lost to Spinks who was supposed to be an easy win.

    Thomas wasn't inconsistent prior to losing to Berbick and he was actually still champ when Holmes lost to Spinks. A simple look at the timeline shows Thomas had actually never lost a fight at the time Holmes was dethroned so any perceived inconsistency with regard to a shot at Holmes is 100% irrelevant. He had never lost to anyone when Holmes was dethroned.

    Thomas went from 78 to 86 before he lost a fight. That's a 7-8 stretch undefeated. For reference that covers the period from just after Holmes beat Norton until just past his loss to Spinks - his entire reign more or less. Now don't get me wrong, there was no clamoring until later in his run as he had trouble getting the meaningful fights. He was actually a substitute for Witherspoon when he battered James Tillis and that was his coming out, so to speak.

    Even after the Berbick loss he only ever lost to Tyson and Holyfield prior to mid 1990.

    So his only losses from 1978 until early 1990 are to Berbick, Tyson and Holyfield. Your statement - "He was way too inconsistent, lost to people he never should have" just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. He most certainly was consistent and the only loss he had in 12 years that we could say he shouldn't have had was to Berbick. In doing this we have to reason that Berbick was a good heavyweight that won quite a few bouts he wasn't favored to win. When he was on song he was a real handful for anyone. He was certainly wasn't supposed to beat Tyson or Holyfield and it's fair to say his very best was probably gone from the time he stepped into the ring with Berbick.
     
  6. RulesMakeItInteresting

    RulesMakeItInteresting Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,985
    10,167
    Mar 23, 2019
    I stand corrected, my friend. Thanks for pointing those things out.
     
  7. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    47,903
    34,359
    Apr 27, 2005
    I love your attitude in here mate and no doubt you are great outside of here.
     
  8. ikrasevic

    ikrasevic For the honorable cross and the golden freedom Full Member

    4,291
    4,703
    Nov 3, 2021
    The result would be the same, if we take into account that against Pinklon Thomas did not box prime Minister Mike Tyson (Mike Tyson from 1988).
    I’ve always been amazed at how many and what kind of punches it took Mike Tyson to bring down Pinklon Thomas.
    Eventually Prime Pinklon Thomas would lose by points.

    P.S. Only now do I see how the titles of champions in the heavyweight category passed from hand to hand in the period 1984-87.
    From the beginning of the end of the reign of Larry Holmes, to the undisputed champion Mike Tyson.
    ...Larry Holmes, Michael Spinks, Tony Tucker, Greg Page, Tony Tubbs, Tim Witherspoon, James Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick...and finally Mike Tyson.
    I don't think such an "exchange of belts" will happen again.
     
  9. Eddie Ezzard

    Eddie Ezzard Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,271
    4,642
    Jan 19, 2016
    Agreed. My impression also.
     
  10. Dynamicpuncher

    Dynamicpuncher Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,512
    15,439
    Jan 14, 2022
    I agree i'm actually a fan of Larry Holmes, but his opponents after 1982 were very questionable to say the least. People like Witherspoon only look good with hindsight. I'm not sure many people rated Witherspoon that highly after getting controversial decisions vs Snipes, then there's fighters like Rodriguez, Frank, Frazier, even someone like Carl Williams who i actually like as a fighter. Was he really that highly rated ? in his previous fight to Holmes he was floored twice by James Tillis, again Williams only looks good with hindsight after his performance vs Holmes.

    Weaver rematch, Page, Coetzee, Tubbs, Thomas, some of these fights needed to happen, and i think Holmes's reign would of looked better. As it stands Holmes still has an impressive reign 20 title defences is not to be sniffed at, but i feel like mostly Holmes's title defences after 1982, were quite lackluster and it could of been better.

    As for Thomas vs Holmes i think a prime Holmes, would for certain would edge Thomas and win by decision, but during when they were actually supposed to fight ? i think Thomas would decision Holmes.
     
  11. rinsj

    rinsj Active Member Full Member

    741
    290
    May 19, 2007
    "his opponents after 1982 were very questionable to say the least"
    I fail to see how Evangelista, Zanon, Jones, and LeDoux were superior to Witherspoon, Smith, and Williams.
     
  12. Dynamicpuncher

    Dynamicpuncher Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,512
    15,439
    Jan 14, 2022
    Well all you've done is just find the worst opponents, without mentioning Norton, Berbick, Shavers x2, Weaver, Cobb, Snipes, Cooney, Ocasio beat Jimmy Young twice, clearly Holmes's record is better when he won the title up until after 83, when he had alot of questionable defences. When there was better challengers out there.

    That's the point I was trying to make with Thomas, clearly Holmes because he wanted to break Marciano's record. Opted for a few easier defences rather than take on bigger threats like Page, Thomas, etc.

    I'd say after the Witherspoon scare, that Holmes probably decided against ever fighting the likes of Page and Thomas.
     
    Bonecrusher, Bokaj and JohnThomas1 like this.
  13. rinsj

    rinsj Active Member Full Member

    741
    290
    May 19, 2007
    Shavers, Cobb, Snipes, Cooney, Ocasio never became Heavyweight champions, whereas Witherspoon (x2), and Smith did. As for Holmes not fighting Page. Well, Bey beat Page, so Holmes fought him. Page was very inconsistent. As for Thomas, all he had was a jab, his punches were not particularly fluid like those of Holmes. I would not consider Thomas to be an opponent to instill fear into anyone, least of all Holmes.
     
  14. Dynamicpuncher

    Dynamicpuncher Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,512
    15,439
    Jan 14, 2022

    I said "After" the Tim Witherspoon scare, that Larry Holmes didn't fight the best opponents available. Yes i'm aware Bonecrusher Smith briefly held the title, and lucked out fighting a grossly overweight/unmotivated Tim Witherspoon. Who was getting robbed blind by Don King. I don't necessarily always agree with that logic, that just because someone briefly held a title "Smith" didn't make any defences. That makes him better than certain other fighters, not taking anything away from Smith. He was given a very good set of circumstances and took his chance congrats to him, but lets be real he was no real better than the likes of Cooney, Snipes, Cobb, Shavers.

    Greg Page was Larry Holmes's mandatory in 1983, Page had rebounded from his upset loss to Berbick. And had beaten James Tillis and Renaldo Snipes impressively on the undercard of Witherspoon/Holmes. Holmes gave up his WBC title rather than facing Greg Page in 1983, and instead fought the likes of Scott Frank and Marvis Frazier in 1983. Yes were all aware Page became a very inconsistent fighter, and lost to alot of fighters that he shouldn't of, because he was a very lazy fighter. But during 1982-1983 period he was a very live threat to Holmes, and Holmes gave up the title and fought two very uninspiring opponents, rather than facing his biggest threat at that time "Greg Page".

    As @JohnThomas1 has already pointed out earlier in this thread, Pinklon Thomas went undefeated through 1978-1985. Which is as long as Larry Holmes's entire title reign. Thomas had totally out boxed a prime Tim Witherspoon, destroyed Mike Weaver, two opponents who gave a prime Larry Holmes hell. And was rated number 4 in 1983, number 1 in 1984, number 1 in 1985. Instead of fighting Pinklon Thomas who at that time was the most challenging opponent for Holmes, Holmes instead fought Bonecrusher Smith, Bey, Williams, LHW Michael Spinks, If you honestly don't think Pinklon Thomas wasn't a major threat to Holmes in 1984-1985, and didn't have a good chance of beating him during this period then i have to say i'm a bit baffled.

    Holmes decided to coast after the Tim Witherspoon scare, because he wanted to break Marciano's 49-0 record. And decided to take an easier route, rather than fighting the biggest threats during 1983-1985 period. As i said earlier in this thread i'm a fan of Larry Holmes and i enjoy his fights. But i tell it how it is and Larry Holmes didn't fight some of his biggest threats Coetzee, Page, Thomas, Weaver rematch.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2022
    Bonecrusher, Bokaj and JohnThomas1 like this.
  15. rinsj

    rinsj Active Member Full Member

    741
    290
    May 19, 2007
    Despite the utterly shamless, biased commentary, I scored Witherspoon-Holmes 9 rounds to 3 for Holmes. To my eyes, it was not close. The only clear round for Timmy was 9, and even then Holmes came back strong to close the round. Conversely, Witherspoon vs Thomas was very close. Thomas was undefeated, yet he managed to "draw" with Coetzee (who was brutally ko'd by Weaver who had already been tko'd by Holmes) and lost to Berbick, who Holmes already beat soundly. All of Thomas opponents from 1978-82 were complete sacrilege with the exception of Tillis. In reality, Thomas was only hot stuff for a very brief window.