But the HBO unification was already in process when Tyson came along. It meant mike landed unification fights straight away. Sure tyson was the best around and good enough to win it but in many ways it was a win-win situation. The contracts were in place to unify and most of the name fighters out there had already had their day. Tyson had already blown the title by the time the next generation (from his own age group) were established. Holmes would have crucified Ali and Leon Spinks in 1978 if he had of been allowed to. Imagine how much better Holmes would have looked had he only sought fighters from beyond that period that the previous champion had already dealt with and ignored weaver, shavers, berbick, cooney etc?
Just like he crucified Ken Norton? And Tyson was ****in 20 years old. Who else was in his age group? You make it sound like Tyson's opponents were old men and bums. IMO they were more seasoned and experienced and trained harder when facing Tyson in fear of getting demolished by the best fighter in the world.
You are right there was a lot of fear. Tubbs trained so hard he did not make his bonus to come in shape. Those guys did not come to win. Most of them had their turn as a champ, it was a retirement fund. You stay seasoned by beating curent rated fighters. Its not Tysons fault, those guys were the names to keep himself busy until holyfeild, mercer, ruddock, mccall, lewis and bowe could establish themselves. Theres no geting away from it holmes, thomas and tubbs were yesterdays men when tyson faced them. Even spinks had no ambition left otherwise he would have fought Tucker instead of Tangstad. The younger fighters who were just geting started and coming into the edge of world class would have all come to fight but of course Tyson couldnt keep the title long enough to meet them.
He took one against Boncrusher in the last round, one agaions Tucker in the first round and i think Colay tagged him as well
It wasnt keeping the title, it was prison which prevented him from fighting these guys when the division was just picking up.
No the divisions contenders were not picking up. Only Bowe and Holyfield were emerging as good challengers. Lewis was still a no namer until the Ruddock fight. The usual suspects were all worse than the 80's crop. Mercer and Mcall couldnt even beat the old 80's guys. Choklab, you dont know WTF your talking about.
That isn't a barometer for greatness, its that kind of hollywood bull**** drama in a rockylike fight that people seem to fall for as though it's a criteria to make someone great. I give more points to guys who don't hit the floor in the first place. As for the thread, I definitely wouldn't rank Tyson ahead of Holmes based on my criteria although you can make an argument for it. Holmes reigned longer, had more defenses and has beaten many ranked contenders. Unification was a way of screwing Holmes, the champion, out of fees to different bodies.
he had lost to douglas before prison. Tyson had to beat the former belt holders first because there was more money in those fights and it was crucial for his resume and got him through a lean patch. spinks-Tyson was huge, A fight I wanted to see, but looking back Tyson was only ever going to be tested by the next batch of guys because tubs and co were yesterdays news. I did not know it then but I do now. Those guys had no ambition, Tyson would have posibly been beter prepared for douglas facing contenders yet to contest for HW titles like damiani, norris even garry mason. Too bad douglas beat Tyson when he did because Holyfeild was coming up, so was ruddock, they would have made beter chalengers 89-90.
He fought Ruddock twice. You make such a stink about Tony Tucker being so great when Seldon faced him, but refuse to acknowledge Tubbs had only one razor close loss to Witherspoon and Tyson destroyed him in two.
Thats one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is tubbs only made the ring ratings two years 1985 and 1986. He fought Tyson in 1988 when he was unrated, at the expence of holyfeild, witherspoon, ruddock, orlin norris who were rated that year all because tubbs beat a comebacking lightheavyweight having his first fight in 3 years. since march 85' Tyson was 33-0 and Tubbs was 4-1.
You make it seem like Tubbs was on the decline. Tubbs had one razor loss to Spoon, went on to win every fight until losing to Bowe in 91. His loss to Butler was probably the start of his initial decline, but it wasnt until 94 that Tubbs was a has been. Tubbs only had 25 fights when he faced Tyson, he was far from being washed up. Ruddock wasnt even close to being a contender until 89, and Holyfield wasnt even a heavyweight yet. :rofl
Ring ratings 1988. Champion mike Tyson Holyfeild carl williams adilson rodrigues witherspoon dokes razor ruddock tony tucker orlin norris Buster douglas francesco damiani Ok, three things. #1 where the hell is tony tubbs on this list? #2 why is holyfeild number one contender if he wasnt a heavyweight? #3 whos that at number 6 in the ratings?
As selected by The Ring magazine in the This content is protected issue Wrong year bud a classic boxrec mistake, Holyfield's first HW win over a top contender was Thomas in December '88, the Dokes win in March 89 propelled him to no1 after Tyson had dispatched of Bruno
Holyfield didnt even have a heavyweight fight when Tubbs fought Tyson how could he be ranked higher? :nut Stop pulling **** out of your arse.