I remember reading the great paeans from the magazines about Frank Fletcher vs. Clint Jackson. While it is an entertaining tussle as far as that goes, it wasn't great by any means. Too one-sided. Jackson seemed to want to wait for Fletcher to tire out before going to work and he never did.
Tyson vs Holyfield 1 was considered as Fight of the Year of 1996. Personally I wasn’t too crazy for that fight, too much grappling for my liking.
Tyson. Probably the most exciting figher ever. But somehow I found him boring. ( prob not boring but predictable).
Generally an exciting fighter, but there have been stretches in certain fights where Armstrong turned into a repetitive bore. Which isnt a bad thing to be, for a fighter of his style.
Excellent call ! I considered this fight a good **** since the first time I watched it, and I still consider it today. Tyson could not give a fart without Holyfield grappling him.
Johnny Tapia became boring as he moved up in weight. He had no power once he moved up past 118. Worse though he started to go to extremes antics in the rring. Smiling, laughing, making gestures anything but boxing. Johnny was faking the funk.
The first one was good. Would have been better in 91 but still. Great victory for holyfield and he deserves credit. The rematch was the true disaster. You would have thought it would be a classic with tyson showing up ripped and starting round 1 with headmovement and jabbing, but Holyfield really took the wrestling mauling and butting to a new level and tyson couldnt take the medicine he had dished out to plenty of others and had a meltdown like a spoiled child.
De La Hoya used too much movement and didn`t throw enough powerful right hands, Leonard used to go long spells during fights not throwing any punches.
When people think of Marvin Hagler they automatically think of the guy from the Hearns fight...but he was really a cerebral type of fighter...When I began to study him I was disappointed..I was expecting a middleweight Holyfield