If Old Man Foreman didn't duck Tony Tucker in 1995

Would Tony have become Lineal Champion? Foreman was actually stripped of his WBA title for failing to defend against Tony Tucker. It's too bad Tony didn't get the chance. Tony was long past his prime in 1995, but then again so was foreman! Tucker looked dreadful vs Seldon in 95...but fought Lewis hard in 93. Who knows. Foreman looked equally as dreadful in 95 vs Shulz.

 

it would have been a nice fight

 

If Foreman caught Tony, at that time, Tucker would've been stopped.

 

Tucker had slipped pretty considerably by that point. Still an interesting fight though.

I'm more interested in what would of happened had Spinks not ditched his belt when he had to face Tucker.

 

I think Foreman would've found a way to win. He didn't look great vs. Schulz in 1995 (WMD12)... but who was Schulz at that time? Foreman underestimated Schulz for sure and almost lost to him. Many felt Schulz won the fight. He was stripped of the IBF belt for not giving Schulz a rematch.

His next fight (1996) was vs. Crawford Grimsley. Again, Foreman did not look great but this time he did clearly win.

In 1997 he looked strong vs. better known opponents Lou Savarese (WSD12) and Shannon Briggs (LMD12). Many felt he beat Briggs.

 

Tucker was denied two shots at the lineal title vs Spinks and later Foreman.

It is not too far fetched to imagine him coming out on top in one or the other of these.

 

In 1995 Tucker got the crap beat out of him by Bruce Seldon (LKOby7). He had won 4 in a row (all by KO) following his loss to Lewis in '93. The 4 guys he beat aren't even worth mentioning though... the best one of the bunch was Cecil Coffee who had been stopped 4 times before his loss to Tucker (LKOby2) including a 2nd round KO loss to Bert Cooper.

Tucker went on to lose to H. Akinwande (L10), O. Norris (L10), H. Hide (LKOby2), and John Ruiz (LKOby11).

 

I thought Spinks was stripped because he didn't want to fight in the unification tournament... won by Tyson. I thought it was Tyson he was really afraid of.

 

I really don't think that Tony Tucker would have been up to the task in 1995.. I saw his match with Seldon live back then, and both his skills and physical abilities were thoroughly diminished. Tucker did not have the mobility at that point to out move and outpoint Foreman the way that Schultz and Morrison did... Nor did he have the strength, power or inside tactics to control George in close. I can see Foreman wearing him down for a late stoppage or taking the fight comfortably on the cards..

 

Neither Tucker nor Seldon were even close to being deserving of a title shot in 1995.. Both were feasting on Journeyman, and in Seldon's case had accumulated losses to lesser fighters that weren't being redeamed by anything spectacular. I can remember Larry Merchant saying how ludicrous it was that the WBA had both Tucker and Seldon rated above Riddick Bowe, and how the whole thing reaked of Don King Politics.. Tucker, Bruno, Seldon and McCall were all being steared into title elimination settings for the purpose of being lighter pickings for Tyson to win a belt upon coming out of prison, and a number of people back then had even made this observation. On another note, the Lewis - Tucker fight was a less than impressive display. Tucker did not engage Lewis at all, and in the rare instance that he landed a few shots, would not make any attempt to follow up with anything. I haven't seen the fight since it aired in 1993, but from memory there were a lot of boos from the crowd and I can't recall giving Tony more than perhaps maybe 2 rounds.

 

Lewis W12 Tucker was a stinker... Tucker was down twice though

 

I think the same thing happens, that happened in every single won of Georges comeback fights. Tucker starts dancing and running. This is the way everyone fought George, and this is why George handpicked opponents who would stand in front of him and trade, but it didnt work because every single one of them stuck and moved. The question is could Tucker stick and move. He was a much higher calliber than the likes of Briggs or Shulz, who were not really considered top challengers. I think Tucker wins.

 

Tucker was no longer using his legs in 1995. He was a far far cry from the version fighting in 1985. in 1995, even an old foreman had the better legs of the 2.

 

1995 was the end of Tucker's time as a player in the division.

On the other hand, if Foreman was that confident of a win you know he'd have taken the fight on. He'd have to have had some question in his mind about it to not want it. Tucker's size, his punches or his durability, perhaps all three, but something.

That's all that gives me pause, because I think Foreman would've taken Tucker in 1995 if they'd fought. Tucker at that time was just not a stick 'n' mover like Schulz was, plus he was never a high workrate kind of guy either. He'd probably go the distance, but I'd be backing Foreman.

Then Foreman would've still been both WBA & IBF champion, heading into the autumn...things could've been very different. Foreman-Tyson and Foreman-Bowe were both heavily touted as big money possibilities (while Foreman kept giving Moorer the runaround for a rematch).

Instead he had the poor Schulz showing, was stripped of both belts and didn't fight again for like 15 months.

 

If you are going to watch it, just watch about the last minute of round 8 then switch off. That's the best action you're going to get!