Shot Fighters - Who gets the most credit...

Ali-Holmes. Ali's fans still had the hope I guess that Ali would beat him. Larry would receive numerous calls a day saying he would get KO'd. People let their better judgement slip in that fight.

 

Holmes barely received any real credit for beating up on the zombie version of Ali and rightly so (not that it was his fault, mind). Strange choice. :huh

 

Stracey over Napoles is my (immediate) choice.

 

George Foreman and Muhammad Ali get a lot of credit for beating a greatly diminished version of Joe Frazier. Frazier was at his best for the first Jimmy Ellis fight through the first Ali fight. After that he gained weight, and was never the same fighter. Frazier was not totally "shot" as a fighter, but he was not what he had been.

 

Oh, oops, my bad I didn't read the whole title.

 

Mike Tyson vs Michael Spinks and Larry Holmes. He gets a lot of credit for beating shells of their prime selves, and IMO for no reason at all.

 

Gerry Cooney came to my mind immediately...

 

Lewis over Tyson got a lot of credit I think.

A lot of people's opinion of Lewis heightened after that fight and I'm still not quite sure why. Williams and McBride were able to do the same thing.:hi:

 

How about these reasons:

No one saw Spinks as a shell of his former self and he held the linear title. It's not just about the fact that he beat Spinks but that he completely destroyed him in 90 seconds.

Holmes would go on to beat a top contender FIVE years later. Now you may come with all the excuses that Holmes took the fight on two minutes notice by the evil Don King etc, but 4 rounds isn't exactly the point where lack of conditioning sets in badly. It was a good win for Tyson.

 

In some quarters he does, but it is also something that is used to discredit him in other quarters. It was a fight that the ppv companys were always going to make because joe public still thought Tyson had something and still werent convinced by Lewis.

 

George Foreman, the so called expert, jumped on Lewis' bandwagon by claiming he'd beat Muhammad Ali after Lewis demolished Tyson.

I'm not saying Lewis wouldn't have a shot in the dark against Ali, I give him at least that, but it's almost as if Lewis became an elite fighter only after beating old Tyson.

The Tyson that was demolished was a joke. :tired

 

Spinks: Linear Champ, undefeated and took the title from Holmes twice. People gave him shot to upset Tyson. Tyson made it look easier than it should have been. Good win.

Holmes: The fact that it ended in 4 rounds IMO means that conditioning didnt really come into play. And as self centered as Larry Holmes was and considering his pedigree I have a hard time believing he was in there for the payday. Solid win.

 

I'd say Buster Douglas Vs Mike Tyson

I think the version of Mike Tyson who lost to McBride would defeat the '90 version.

He begun to believe his own hype, refused to do roadwork so was horrendously out of shape (didn't even have one good round in him), his timing was off, his head movement was non existent, he abandoned his jab, and just looked awful. He was there for the taking that night, but Buster gets an awful lot of credit for it.

 

I'm pretty sure Qawi floored Spinks. And also, just because your undefeated doesn't mean your still at your peak and not past it. Look at Marciano, if he came back in 1965, undefeated, to challenge Ali for the title, would you say he was shot? No, using your logic. Spinks was also shot as a fighter in the Tyson fight. If you look, he is wearing a knee brace, and he was retired for a year. 4 years later, Larry came back to beat Mercer and have a decent comeback, but IMO the Larry of the Mercer, McCall, and Holyfield fight could take the Larry of the Tyson fight.