Why does Tyson get a pass?

Thomas and Biggs were not on drugs.

Spinks got knocked out before his knee even remotely could've been an issue.

Tyson also won fights with injuries and while having his personal life in turmoil. He never looked as off as in Tokyo until probably the Botha fight.

 

Yes he did. People on drugs often cover it up.

 

It’s funny how your logic skips over Tyson, who did more drugs than his opponents.

 

Biggs was 15-0 with 3 good wins when he lost to Tyson. Douglas started out 16-1. After the Ferguson loss Douglas had 1 close loss in 5 years to Tony Tucker.

Jesse Ferguson beat Ray Mercer almost outpointed Smith and McCall too. He knocked down Carl Williams. Theres no shame in losing a close 10 rounder to undefeated Jesse Ferguson. Jesse Ferguson isn't a champion but hes a title contender as is Bey.

Most of the losses to champs you're referring to came in title fights, USBA/NABF or eliminators. They weren't facing challenges like that super early. Now Douglas challenging himself wasn't any more intentional than Tucker etc not fighting anyone of note. Bey for example was a debutant I don't think Douglas went into that fight thinking he'd be fighting a top guy. No one knew Tangstad would be the Euro champ. I'm not criticizing anyone here but the dust has settled and we know what these fighters became now and how to weigh them.

Spinks is 4-1 at HW he was undefeated at LHW hes the only HW champ in history to beat less HW opponents than Usyk. I do not think Spinks proved he was better than Holmes's best contenders at the end of his reign he got gifted the title shot based on LHW feats. While Cooney and Tangstad are good wins Spinks didn't beat any of the people who would have otherwise gotten his shot at Holmes.

 

So how many HWs did Spinks beat before he went out to fight Holmes. With Holmes who didn't have a break, had a normal camp twice etc. How many?
And I would still like to hear the answer to the question - if Douglas was so great how did it happen that his CV looks so terrible or CV Mike? how did it happen that he lost to Tucker and Ferguson whom Tyson beat in the 2nd and 3rd year of his career?

 

0. He got the shot on the basis of being a dominant LHW champion.

Douglas's CV doesn't look terrible thats my point. He was 29-4-1 before the Holyfield fight with wins over Cobb, Page,Berbick, McCall and Tyson. Would have beat Tangstad if not for point deductions. Almost beat Tucker narrowly lost to Ferguson.

Tysons CV is better but Tyson was a reigning champ. Even the best challengers CV shouldn't be better than someone whose a reigning champ with 9 defenses in that same period. The champion fights a top guy every single fight. A non champion does not.

Tyson might have lost to Tucker if title fights were 15 rounds btw. That was his 2nd toughest title fight from his first career.

 

Not going to address the whole post because you’re pointlessly twisting the truth on topics we’re well versed in, such as skipping over that Biggs was the best heavyweight am entering the pros, not Tyson, and they turned pro around the same time. Tyson also mopped the floor with Ferguson in a nothing fight as a prospect so there’s that.

 

but do I understand correctly? You think Douglas was a great fighter on a similar level to Tyson because he was close to defeating Jesse Ferguson who Tyson outclassed at the same time and that just a year after becoming a pro.. I really don't mean to offend anyone but let someone explain to me the logic of these arguments. Tyson's and Douglas' entire careers show that they were on a different level. 42-1 didn't come out of thin air. Why didn't anyone give Douglas a chance? Didn't anyone see those great fights Buster had with Ferguson, Tucker, Berbick?

 

You l are trying to make this about Douglas v Tyson. I'm saying Douglas was one of the best HWs of the 80s and wasn't a "journeyman" who had one great fight. You're shifting the argument to whether Douglas is better than Tyson. Thats not the point. The point that is that Douglas was an elite HW who was one of Tysons toughest title defenses if not the singular toughest one.

 

Douglas losing his mother weeks before the fight is just about the biggest personal turmoil a fighter can experience.

 

*motivation

 

Pinklon Thomas was spending his days in a crack den during the time of the Berbick & Tyson fight. Thomas has admitted as much in his post fight career and in print in an issue of Boxing Illustrated.

It affected his performances in both the Berbick and Tyson fights and he suddenly became a shot fighter who than went on a long downward spiral in the ring . You appear to have issues linking the two things.

You're whataboutery about Tyson is besides the point. During the period of the Thomas bout ie 1987 which is the only date of relavence here......under Jacobs,Cayton,Rooney and Lott... Tyson was not drinking and doing drugs as he was during his post prison career or his mid to late 1970s Brownsville period.

 

You ought to read Tris Dixons book where he travels and meets many fighters from the 1970s and 80's. There's a chapter on Tyrell Biggs whom Dixon meets in Philadelphia circa the mid 2000s . Biggs admits he started doing drugs again from the time of the Bey and Snipes fights. The Duvas this rushed him into a fight with Tyson.

 

I'd agree with the wider point you're trying to make. Tyson even in his peak ie the 1980's or the Rooney years...often didn't train....his ' drugs ' were womanising and partying and he had a world of heartache around the Givens dalliance. In his book he says he had gonorrhea during the Berbick fight.For Tubbs he barely trained .He says about this period ' It became a habit not training for this guy and that guy than training for the other one'. He sure as he'll had a world of problems before the Spinks and Bruno fights.
So it follows you're saying we may not even have seen Tyson at his absolute best and he could have achieved so much more.....again I'd agree with you on that no neck.

 

My opinion of Thomas is this:
1. He fought a good fight against Tyson and had a good camp for the fight and was in his twenties. I'll take it at face value.
2. I've most recently seen him blame the Tyson loss on a shoulder injury, but in the Ted Kluck book (https://archive.org/details/facingtysonfifte00teda/page/93/mode/1up) he never mentions a shoulder injury and instead blames an issue with his glove. I haven't seen him blame drugs. My conclusion is that he's a bit of a bs artist and he lost to Tyson because he was easy to hit with flush punches to the face, but could take it against other fighters.
3. I think he was hanging out in music studios too much and probably doing some cocaine and drinking too much around the time of the Weaver and Berbick fights. He got away with it once and narrowly lost in his next fight. I don't think he was a full blown addict at that point and wouldn't even call it atypical compared to other fighters from the 80s.
4. He has repeatedly said that he went on cocaine and heroin binges after Tyson and Holyfield and hit rock bottom after Holyfield. I believe him.

I think Tyson's win over him was respectable and Thomas was only marginally worse than against Witherspoon.