Well he was 215 against Damiani and 225 against Morrison and 220 against Bert Cooper according to boxrec. I think he must have trained okay for Holyfield since it was his first fight in 10 months and he was 22 pounds lighter than his previous outing. But still, I agree he was probably not tip-top. You might be right about his condition for Holmes, but I dont know if that was what cost him the fight. Mercer was a tough fighter but not really much of a boxer. Old man Holmes exposed that fact, and Jesse Ferguson confirmed it.
You don't win a golden medal at the olympics while not being much of a boxer; olympics aren't won on toughness. Mercer sure had his bad moments (Holmes, Fergusson and nearly Damiani) but he performed very well against Holyfield and Lewis. He deserves a little more credit.
He won his gold medal with his strength, power and toughness. He was a 27 year old iron chinned US marine, not a fancy dan classic boxer. His performances in Seoul '88 evoked one or two flattering comparisons to Frazier in '64. It's a myth that a fighter must be something of a classic boxer to win a major amateur title. George Foreman bludgeoned his way to gold in typically uncivilized manner. Mercer BATTERED that big korean guy, he didn't win by outboxing him. And I doubt that big korean was any slickster either. Mercer seems to have won the olympic trials and the olympic games by being a tough badass, not by being any extraordinarily refined amateur boxer. Of course the Cubans boycotting helped him out. I give Mercer plenty of credit. In less-than-good condition he almost beat Lennox Lewis, arguably deserved a draw. In less-than-good condition he gave a still-decent Holyfield one hell of a fight. He scored some very good legit wins. In top shape who knows what he could have achieved? Plus, he improved during his career AS A BOXER. He obviously had boxing skills, but I doubt he would have cracked the top 10 if he'd had the chin and (deficient) fighting spirit of say a Michael Moorer.
The edge in power maybe goes out to Lyle, but its only a slight edge, Ray is a very good boxer to compliment the power, where as Rons power is very raw.. Ray should get by this on having the more dependable chin (oops.. late career has shown chinks) but in his prime the chops are a tad more sturdy than Lyles.. A great shoot em up though.. I'd expect some exciting rounds..
It is interesting, Mercer and Lyle are probably as resembling as two boxers you'll get. Even in terms of age they are similar in that they picked up boxing late. Both may have been a bit better if they started at say 18.
mercer by decision.....mercer had trouble with techincians.............ron lyle was not that:smoke:smoke:smoke:smoke
You just had to slander Quarry didn't you, for no reason. So anyway I'll stay on the subject. I like Lyle by decision. Mercer was too inconsistent, though he was a tough SOB in his day. Lyle was also a tough SOB, but I think deep down inside was a little "meaner" than Mercer. Mercer had a hell of fight with Holyfield, a great give and take battle until Holyfield knocked Mercer down. After that Mercer wasn't so eager for the give take scenario. Lyle went to hell and back with Foreman. Foreman had Lyle trapped on the ropes and almost out in the second round, but round ended (a minute early if I recall correctly). Yet next round Lyles back at it with Foreman, the guy was a mean SOB! Later Lyle knocks Foreman down, it is the only time I've seen a fighter get knocked down and land face first and get up and win. So when it gets down to the nut cutting, I think Lyle out "means" Mercer.
i agree... but i think that mercer would brawl with lyle just like he did with bert cooper, simply this time he loses
Mercer lost to Jesse Ferguson, and a draw (really a loss, imo) to Marion Wilson. He was wildly inconsistent. Lyle's only shameful loss was to Lynn Ball when Ron was already in his late 30's. I pick Lyle.