But when was Bryd considered the next big thing? Ike might have been considered the next big thing for a moment (off the back if Bryd) but that moment pased. If Ike beat Rahman, golota, Grant, Holyfeild or Lennox Lewis you could claim Ike deserves to be in a discussion with great fighters. We don't know if he could beat Micheal Grant.
you seem not to get that you don't compare eras you compare the fighters that is the evidence not the era . This is the same backwards theory you have on trainers,which is the first important thing a fighter can have b/c without a fitting one they cannot perform at optimal level to achieve their best possible skills.
Floyd has been knocked down to many times to say he beats a giant like Ike. This would be looked upon as a joke if this fight were to be sanctioned today. Liston was not near as intimidating as Ike, Ike simply plows over the 200 pound or Patterson,i cant see any logical out come or way Floyd beats Ike.
Ike was very unproven. His record's not even equal to Ray Mercer's prior to the Holmes defeat. He looked quite crude in his real fights, but seemed to have potential for improvements. I would steer Patterson away from him if I was Floyd's manager but there's really not much in Ike's fights to say Floyd can't beat him.
if you just compared the fighters on face value it is only half the story! In doing that even an idiot who has,never seen boxing, looks at Floyd then turns to Ike and decides the little guy with the quiff is overmatched. It is as idiotic as the logic in picking a male model to beat a boxer in a boxing fight just because the male model was tanned and looked like he works out a bit more. Ask the same idiot who wins out of Micheal Grant and Ike Ibeabuchi and he might be undecided because they are both tall and muscular. He might even chose Grant on account of his height. That's why we need the era to know what a fighter can do. The era shows what the fighter could do when he was in that era, it is important to see how he performed. It is important to Gauge where Micheal Grant is in the big scheme of things historically then decide if ike could even beat him. And so far as Grant v Ibeabuchi, We don't even know!
An idiot would pick the 65/75 pound lighter guy who had the most ever knockdowns as a Hw champion in history around 20 or so to that of one of the most feared punchers ever. It would be a mismatch beyond reason for Floyd who fought between 185 and 200 pounds. who cares where Grant is ,it has nothing to do with a better little guy trying to knock down a mountain with devastating punching, cus would have made Floyd retire if Ike was in the 1950's/1960's. lol.
Have to take Ike due to size and strength differences. No doubt Floyds quick hands could score some points before he started to get steam rolled imo.
who cares where Grant is? Where Grant is in relation to boxing history could be crucial in assessing where to regard ike since they both fought at the same time. It is key to this discussion. Grant actually overshadowed Ike as a contender. Would you back unbeaten Grants chances once he achieved challenger status against ATG champions? Without fighting Lewis would you be raving about Grant? Imagine if Grant got himself locked up and it was Ike that was exposed by Lewis in his place? we just don't know.
No one suggested he was the next big thing, I just showed he was ranked when Ike beat him. You think anyone would bet on Grant?
I pick Ike by ko in this one. The way he pinned down and knocked out Byrd leads me to believe he could beat Patterson by stoppage.
I quite agree, but I am not seeing an obvious path to victory for him. He is not going to stop Ike, and it is hard to see him taking a decision, given Ike's combination of physical advantages and tools. Here I am going to go against my usual policy, and say that I have seen enough to favour Ike.
Grant was 6'7 Patterson was not and has no coorelation of overcoming such a weight desparity since he was known to not react to punchers well ,this is utter foolishness . lol