David Tua versus Jim Corbett

Do you think that Byrd bulking up was critical to him beating Tua?

You might have an argument if he had beaten him by outmuscling him in the clinches, but I think it was basically just speed and technique.

I think that a lot of smaller heavyweights could have replicated Byrd’s feat.

 

My point is maybe Byrd wasn't his most comfortable over 200lb.

 

Can you elaborate? As you see it, how did the fight go? How did Byrd win it?

I think that 215-lb men are much better able to take some of the punches that Byrd absorbed from Tua in that fight and I think that he used his strength and size to disrupt Tua's offense throughout the fight. Big difference between being clinched, stiff-armed, or leaned on by a 215-lb man and a 185-lb one.

 

Yes but if we matched him against somebody whose credentials were slightly tighter than Martins, he would suddenly find himself the underdog, even if that fighter looked less impressive on film.

The main reason for this would be not the other fighter’s superior resume, but the things that his resume did not prove.

In Tua’s case we have a fighter whose resume fails to prove a lot, and worse he was given multiple chances to prove those things.

 

He boxed Tua’s ears off.

 

I edited my original post. But how exactly did he box Tua's ears off?

 

And Corbett's resume would look downright dreadful for a late-20th century heavyweight. Look at his record. He got stopped by a super-middleweight and failed to beat various light-heavies. Most of the opponents he beat were nobodies. No handicapper in the world would ever make him the favorite over Tua based on resume. :-( So maybe you don't really mean resume-- seems more likely that you're basing your argument on something else...

 

You can pick holes in Corbett’s resume, but he did beat some opponents, who were top fighters in the division at the time.

Tua did not.

I am sorry but you would be on very safe ground arguing that a lineal champion had a better resume, than a contender who only ever beat one ranked opponent, and only beat him by cheating.

 

Different doesn't matter. Better does.

Even though Byrd is a really good fighter, Corbett looks way better to me.

His footwork and ring movement is special. Byrd did everything good, but he doesn't have those special traits like Corbett.

 

I love how you silly motherfvckers ignore people who make sense. Chris Byrd was 215 Lbs. when he faced Tua! He fought two fights under the HW limit to start his career then he was at HW for 13 1/2 fvcking years! He dropped below HW (which was not a good ideal) for his last 2 fights and went 1-1 (1).

Byrd was a fast, elusive, and durable southpaw with good stamina. He was physically weaker than many of the HWs he faced like Ibeabuchi, V. and W. Klitschko (twice), Tua, Holyfield, Golota, McCline, and some others but he went 4-3-1 (1) vs. these 7 men. Also, Byrd was stronger than a lot of people think. He wasn't a powerhouse but he could bench press 300 Lbs. Holyfield could put up 400 according to Lee Haney and a few others.

Take a guy like DaVarryl Williamson. 6'4" with an 80" reach and a lean 215 Lbs. when he fought Byrd. Harris was a good boxer with good power and would be a nightmare for plenty of those old timers. Byrd outboxed Williamson and took his best punches.

How about a guy like Mo Harris? Another 6'4" guy with an 80" reach. He was 224 1/2 Lbs. vs. Byrd and was thought to provide Byrd a lot of trouble, maybe even upset him. Byrd easily outboxed Harris who had won 11 out of his last 13 fights. In those 13 fights he beat Jimmy Thunder KO7, lost a questionable SD to Larry Holmes, won 9 out of 10 rounds vs. Jeremy Williams and beat him all over the ring, lost a shoot out vs. Derrick Jefferson LKOby6 (but it was a very good fight), and stopped 5 others.

Ok, maybe I went off in the wrong direction. My point is that Corbett and Byrd are two very different animals.

 

I'm not "picking holes" in Corbett's resume, I'm stating essential facts about it!! No gambling expert in the world is picking Corbett to beat Tua based on resume. You're fooling yourself if you pretend otherwise.

BTW, how many heavyweight boxers were there in the world when Corbett became the "lineal champ"? Just curious.

 

He peppered Tua with the jab at will, and was generally successful in either slipping or blocking his shots.

A tidy piece of work, but something that a lot of technicians could have replicated.

 

Haha yeah I get that he was a heavyweight. But for a few fights, he fought drastically lower than HW. Not 10lb, 30lb.

The weight argument doesn't make sense to me. Byrd looked bloated in many of his fights, and he fought around 215.

 

We can argue about who is "greater" but Tua is far better and more formidable than Fitzsimmons. Far better punching skills (especially with combinations), more explosive, stronger, better footwork, infinitely better chin, better head movement, etc. Almost certainly more powerful too but I know people here love the Fitzsimmons fairy tales.

Corbett looks so special in large part because he was fighting against primitive opponents who had no idea how to deal with his tactics. Footwork was excellent against plodding men who followed him around the ring, and his speed and reflexes can't be denied, but his technique would have been far less successful against bigger, more athletic men who could cut off the ring and throw sharp combination punches. What do you think happens when he tries to pull straight back with his hands low against Wlad or Ike? What happens when Tua or Ike catches him on the ropes?

Byrd's skills are far more subtle and less obvious than Corbett's given his superior competition. To appreciate them, you have to watch the subtle footwork and upper body movement, rhythm, and timing that he uses to block combinations from Tua, avoid hooks from Ike, and slip straight punches from Wlad, etc. You also have to take into account how much more difficult those things are than fighting less polished men who are 50-80 pounds smaller.