In 1996 Lennox Lewis was the number 1 contender to Mike Tysons WBC belt, and was poised to challenge for the title in late 1996. Don King had other ideas about that fight and instead opted for Tyson to fight Bruce Seldon for the WBA crown whilst keeping the WBC crown in the Tyson camp thus ducking Lewis. Lewis consequently sued Tyson to force him to defend the WBC against him. Don King would go on to offer Lewis $12.5million to fight Tyson with the caveat that Lewis would sign with King in a multi-fight deal should he win. Lewis refused this offer however would accept a $4million payoff to simply step aside and allow Tyson to fight Seldon. Tyson won that fight easily in what looked to be one of the most blatant dives in championship history and it seemed the stage was set for Tyson vs Lewis. Again Lewis was offered a similar deal to that before, $12million and sign with Don King should he win, he refused this offer wanting instead a purse split (80-20 in Tysons favour) and so Tyson dropped the WBC belt, opting instead to face Evander Holyfield, who agreed to the deal of signing with Don King should he win. Lewis went on to win the vacant WBC belt against Mccall and Tyson vs Holyfield happened, with it a big upset, Holyfield becoming the WBA champ. Holyfield would go on to win the rematch in the infamous "ear bite" fight, it would have appeared that the stage was set for Holyfield vs Lewis to be signed, boxing politics however had other ideas. Don King was adamant that if Lewis was to face Holyfield he would have to sign with Don King. The fight was put on hold. Over the next 2 1/2 years Holyfield would go on to fight Michael Moorer and Vaughn Bean whilst Lewis would defeat Briggs, Golota, Akinwande and Mavrovic. At the point of which the fight seemed to be losing steam it was eventually signed and the two met with Lewis taking $10million and Holyfield taking $20million, Lewis did not sign with King and consequently was robbed of what appeared to be an easy win. This has happened before and will happen again. What's important to note here is the similarity of what's happening today, promoters, managers and networks not wanting to give ground and allow their rivals what they believe to be the upper hand. We could be in this mess for a while before we see any of the big 3 fight each other and there's every chance one of them takes an L in the interim and we may not see the fight we all want to see when we all want to see it.
I well remember all this, as well as waiting for Bowe to fight Lewis. And this may be why the Wilder/Joshua/Fury roundabout bugs me so much now. I also remember being only-half interested in Lewis-Tyson which happened so far down the track that it seemed kind of pointless.
Yah, Lewis vs Tyson was made at the point of which it wasn't relevant anymore. I feel they almost made that mistake with Mayweather vs Pacquiao however the buyrate at which that sold made me a little concerned that promoters would draw out potential superfights in the future.
Personally, I feel that for Joshua ... Wilder is a 'bird in the hand' ... and vice versa. They squabble over percentages and allocations, but if they try to draw it out and in the meantime a bad loss or injury comes along ... then the dynamic is gone. Wilder breaks his hand on Breazeale's head, loses the fight and has a Helenius type injury situation going on, both Wilder and Joshua will be yelling - doh! I understand your point re the financials on Mayweather vs Pacquiao, but on the other hand legacy wise, I don't think the Pac win did all that much for Mayweather. Like Joshua beating a future Wilder (with injury problems and/or a loss to his name), wouldn't be much of a legacy boost for Joshua. Beat him now and it does a lot for the Joshua brand ( and vice versa).
Agreed, I feel he was seen as high-risk low(er) reward than fighting the myriad of decent B level fighters around in the 90's.
