Doesn't matter. Holmes was the better fighter.. Since your taking examples that irrelevant then Lynn Ball beat Lyle. Yes we did... He was prime at the age of 35 against George Foreman.. You may not like the numbers, but it was what it was... with a 7-2 amateur record? Actually, he lost twice in the amatuers, only won 7, and never avenged the two mentioned defeats. A point you keep repeating and one that has no significance. Really? Did you see him fight in his 20's? Fact? Well, isn't it also a fact that men like Bernard Hopkins, Joe Walcott, and Archie Moore were all better fighters in their 30's, than in their 20's? Indeed.
You****ingbum is combatsdeboxeo. As for the thread, Tubbs outboxes Lyle. He was elusive enough to stay away from the powerful but unpolished Lyle. Tubbs would have a few scary moments but ultimately box his way into a decision.
Lynn Ball 1 - Lyle - 0. And that was a professional fight. Was there some other period that you're illuding too? Because the man only had 1 career. Funny, a few posts ago, you said that he lost only one.. Holmes amateur defeat to Bobick and Lyle's win over Bobick has no bearing on Lyle's power or his chance against Tubbs in the pros, but if you want to keep reaching go right ahead. Sullivan had a career in his 20's Lyle never did... I only go by what was actually available to comment on, and not a period in someone's career that never existed. You made the broad generalization...I didn't.... Indeed.
Me too,,,,,,,,,but Ron sleep-walked sometimes, and got discouraged. Tony was too good of a boxer in his prime days, and would not be a stationary target.
Tubbs could box, but he still owned a shaky chin... If Lyle nailed Tubbs, Lyle could win... MR.BILL:bbb
Lyle could nail ANYONE. Tubbs wouldnt take it, too hard it be! :deal Foreman Hoooooooooooooooooooook!:smoke