Showtime has a crazy theory that Mike Tyson was the last. What about Douglas Holyfield, Bowe and Lewis.
Yeah they were being stupid. It was Lewis. You could make a case Wlad was as good as undisputed, which I guess Fury would have inherited, though that argument feels weaker somehow.
Some state it's Tyson and the last time it was contested was Tyson v Bruno 1 .Its because the WBO came in to play shortly after .Stupid really. I personally see it has Lewis / Holyfield .
It is a silly argument though, the WBO wasn't regarded until much later. It'd be like saying Crawford wasn't undisputed because he didn't have the WBF belt
Well, Douglas beat Tyson and then Holyfield beat Douglas, then Bowe beat Holyfield so they were undisputed champs. Lewis beat Holyfield to become undisputed champ. Yeah, forget the WBO. Literally Fourth rate.
But, I have to admit Moorer/Cooper for the WBO Heavyweight title was and AWESOME fight. But, yeah, everyone considered Evander Holyfield to be the HW champ. when that fight took place.
The WBO belt did produce some decent fights back then. I think mercer v Morrison was one of there's .But I never saw there champion s as legitimate.
I total agree. They actually had Damiani has there champion in may 89,so when Tyson had unified all the major belt's they still insisted on there guy being the top man !! As if Damiani had a chance against Tyson back then !
The first undisputed heavyweight champion was Jem Mace! Back then, if you unified the British and American tiles, you were undisputed!
I remember Damiani was talked about as a Tyson opponent in '89. I agree, Tyson would have run over him.
I recall that that to.Think it was pencilled in for after Bruno but Williams got the shot. Tyson would have took him out in 3 IMO .
Y'all're talking about the belts Mike gathered. Is it not possibly youse misunderstood and they were talking about the last guy to actually gather three belts? Seems like AJ's kinda on the Mike course presently, I could draw parallels, maybe that's all they was doin'? I dunno who conversation y'all're talking about myself. Musta missed it. Either way, some good conversation here. I lean anti-wbo myself. If fans said undisputed is now just WBC plus WBA because the IBF and WBO are just offshoots of the WBA I wouldn't argue with them. I don't bother the guys who claim the WBC has the most value because it kind of does. The WBC has gained alliances since the original formation while the WBA spawned two new bodies through their inability to get their **** together. So a WBC champ is a NYSAC + IBU champion while a WBA champ is basically 1/3 NBA. Did he not have the Australian, Canadian, and Irish titles as well? Been a minute since I reviewed Jem in detail but given his range both on the planet and in the ring I'd believe it. They'd be lesser titles anyway so it doesn't really matter I was just curious.
