Tim Witherspoon vs Deontay Wilder

On paper, it's an awful loss, a massive upset and effectively the end of Witherspoon's meaningful career.

However, the fact you are hanging a large part of your case on Witherspoon's loss to Smith, makes clear to anyone reading this thread that you're the one, who knows little about that period, Witherspoon and that bout, in particular. This, despite the backstory to the loss being acknowledged multiple times in the very clip you posted.

Witherspoon didn't bother turning up for Smith. He was resigned to losing that night and I'm fairly certain that the three knockdown rule and early exit suited him. It's that simple.

Added to this, I would ask: Was that the best of Witherspoon, do you think?


Conversely, Wilder did show up for Fury - full of confidence and with a pure intent on winning. The contrast with Witherpoon/Smith is made all the more stark, when we can clearly see Wilder's desire to win, but without a clue about how to, once he began facing some world-level pressure. Wilder ran out of ideas very quickly and one could see, just as rapidly, the confidence drain right out of him, as he was being handed his butt.

So yes, for a guy who was so hyped and ready to go, Wilder's getting plain beaten up, round after round, was far worse than Witherspoon's no-show.

You do realize that Witherspoon was 40/41 years old, when he fought the likes of Thunder, Golota and Nielsen, don't you?

Can you, for just a minute, perhaps imagine the best version of Witherspoon against the best version of Wilder?

Incidentally, which of Wilder's bouts show him at his best, do you think?

As has been pointed out to you already, during this thread, Witherspoon beat a lot of opponents, any one of which would be considered Wilder's best win (and Smith is no exception, here).

Not in every category. Wilder has physical advantages, but would need to become improved as a boxer and actually beat better opposition than did Witherspoon, in order to have the clean sweep over what you're suggesting.

 

Careful folks this guy really knows his stuff.

 

IN EVERY CATERGORY.

If you can't beat Bigfoot Martin, you can't beat Deontay Wilder. You didn't need to be a great boxer to go the distance or fight close with Spoon. Tim Witherspoon, in his 20s, was barely getting by people like Larry Alexander and Jose Ribalta with split or majority decisions.

I get people don't like Wilder, but when Wilder fought someone overmatched, he destroyed ALL of them. Every last one. There are no split decisions or losses to 500-level journeymen on Wilder's record, but there are on Witherspoon's.

I keep hearing "Witherspoon at his best" wins. But you can go back and watch all of Tim's big fights, they're all out there, and in 99 percent of them you see Witherspoon BARELY getting by.

On a board where Wilder can't even beat Butterbean, I get the responses we're seeing here by most mopes.

But people are being ridiculous here. If you CAN'T BEAT BIGFOOT MARTIN, you aren't beating Deontay Wilder. If you're eaking out SPLIT DECISIONS AGAINST LARRY ALEXANDER, you aren't beating Deontay Wilder.

 

And I say that overhand right hand of Tim sends Wilder straight to the hospital.You may have a case for Wilder against an unmotivated and unprepared Tim.

 

I've read his ridiculous book. I've recorded and have all the documentaries and interviews on Witherspoon.

The truth is every time his promoters tried to give Witherspoon the EASIEST opponent they could, he'd still manage to blow it.

Spoon barely got past Tubbs in a slapfest between two fat guys. Spoon blew his drug test (Pot). Spoon was supposed to rematch Tubbs, but Tony, who wouldn't even lose weight if they promised to pay him extra if he got in shape, backed out because he wanted more money.

So they matched Tim with a guy (Smith) who not only Tim had already beaten, but Tubbs had already beaten, and even Marvis Frazier had already beaten ... and Tim got blown out in 90 seconds. Go back and listen to the announcers of that era. They, for the most part, are unforgiving of Witherspoon and most of his bloated peers.

Tyson's sitting at ringside. A unification is on the table for his next fight. And Tim loses in 90 seconds.

It happened when USA was trying to build him, too. Rappaport kept feeding him guys to blow out, like Pritchard, and Tony Willis, and Witherspoon would slog 10 rounds with them.

To get the Moorer WBO title fight, all he had to do was beat a record-padder who had gone years without winning. With Moorer at ringside, Tim loses to Bigfoot Martin. Title fight gone.

"I'll get in shape next time." That was the mantra.

Wilder beats that oaf easy.

 

Right, like that overhand right sent Tony Willis, and James Pritchard and Larry Alexander to the hospital.

Wilder isn't some journeyman Swede.

 

Didn't do nearly as well vs Fury as one though.

 

But he can’t box either. I am sorry but that is how I see it.And I said that already before the Fury fights.Teddy Atlas has the same opinion.With Breland, you would think that he could have at least learnt the basics but no.He is great at throwing the right hand!ATG power, I give him that.I actually like Wilder and hope he can come back from his defeats.I wish him all the best but I am not sure he will be the same fighter when he comes back.

 

He boxed well enough to fight to a 12-round draw with the best heavyweight boxer in the world.

Wilder was one point from winning a split decision in the first Fury fight.

It's been a while. Maybe you should watch that fight again. Check out the punchstats. Watch it with a fresh pair of eyes. He boxes just fine.

In most rounds in that first fight, Fury would land one or two punches more than Wilder in a round, but Wilder was busier. Wilder threw more punches than Fury in 11 of the 12 rounds. But, Fury would nick Wilder in the punches landed by a shot or two. Wilder dropped Fury twice, the second time Fury barely got up.

But the way people around here write about it it was the boxing lesson of all boxing lessons against a guy who doesn't know the first thing about how to box.

For a guy who can't box at all, he sure came damn close to outpointing the best boxer in the division - One measly POINT away from a split decision win.

And you certainly didn't need to be the best boxer in the world to defeat Tim Witherspoon. I don't see Bigfoot Martin or Jimmy Thunder on the list of the best heavyweight boxers of all time.

 

@Dubblechin ,

You keep making this about Witherspoon's overall legacy, which isn't what the thread calls for. Granted, if you want to take all of the worst features of Witherspoon, drawn from across the entire spectrum of his career and try to make the negative essence of this stick as an innate, perennial aspect of Witherspoon, then that's one approach.

However, the problem with your approach is that it falls flat, when it becomes obvious Witherspoon had solid performances amongst the dross and against better opposition than Wilder has beaten. So, regardless of what you think of Witherspoon, he'd be hands-down the best opponent Wilder had faced, next to Fury (and some might argue that Spoon was better than The Gypsy King himself).

And, while Witherspoon took a few of losses in his prime, two of those were against highly rated individuals and one of them a Top-5 ATG Heavyweight, whom he took to the wire.

Witherspoon never had the soul snatched right out of him in the ring, in the manner that Fury took Wilder's. (That was King's job - outside of the ring).

On the basis of a head-to-head, it is the extremity of your viewpoint that is unwarranted. Your incessant gobshiting all over this thread, in defense of your 'put-upon' Wilder has, therefore, come across as a bit of a juvenile and shallow exercise, at Witherspoon's expense. You can't expect to be taken seriously when you get this emotional about it all.

 

It's all semantics with you guys. Better guys than Wilder?

In the last two years, Wilder has fought Luis Ortiz, Tyson Fury, Dominic Breazeale, Luis Ortiz again, Tyson Fury again and he 's fight Tyson Fury again at the end of the year. That's a helluva run.

Ortiz is still ranked in the top five of Ring, Breazeale was the WBC mando, Fury is the #1 fighter in the whole sport and the undefeated World Heavyweight Champ ... and Wilder is about to fight Fury for the third time.

How many times did Tim Witherspoon fight the #1 fighter, the Ring champ? Three or four? No, once. Did he knock Holmes down twice? Did he even draw with Holmes? No and No.

Who were these great fighters Tim beat? Tony Tubbs, who got knocked out in one round by Lionel Butler and the WHITE Jimmy Ellis? Yeah, Tubbs was a monster. (LOL) Bonecrusher Smith, who lost to everyone and also got knocked out by Butler in a couple rounds. Greg Page, who lost 17 times and literally was beaten into a coma by a journeyman? Spoon didn't beat Pinklon Thomas, so we can leave him out. Are we including Quick Tillis, who lost 22 times? (How many times have Ortiz and Fury and Breazeale lost again? Who beat them?)

That revolving door of guys is clearly better than the top guys now, in your mind?

Well, I was around then, and I am around now, and they WEREN'T better. Not by a long shot.

Have Ortiz or Fury or Breazeale been knocked out in one round by a Butler or an Ellis, like Spoon's best wins did?

Wilder is better than Spoon in every regard. Wilder wins easy.

IF YOU CAN'T BEAT BIGFOOT MARTIN in a tuneup to get an important title shot, literally the easiest guy to beat at that time in the heavyweight division, a guy who hadn't won in years, and didn't win for years after that, you can't beat Wilder.

Simple as that. There's nothing FLAT about that. If you can't beat Bigfoot Martin, the argument is over.

If Wilder couldn't beat Bigfoot Martin, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

The fact that we are, shows how insane this board has gotten in their bias against Wilder.

A FIVE-YEAR, 10 defense WBC heavyweight champ, whose single loss is to the LINEAL champ, against freaking Tim Witherspoon.

Seriously, get your heads out of your asses.

 

Bruno beat the 270 pounds Mike Evans, the 257 pounds Bugner, the 6'7" tall 245 pounds Eklund these prove Frank could beat
big guys. True, Fury is big because he's fat otherwise this Fury thing a weak argument because Wilder couldn't beat Fury.
For example Lennox Lewis couldn't beat Bruno easily and i think Lewis was better than Fury.
Sad to see a great boxing fan like you licks Wilder's overrated ass.

 

Wilder floored Fury twice and successfully defended his WBC heavyweight title against Fury, the Ring champ.

It's no different than Lennox Lewis's draw with Holyfield, Jack Johnson's draw with Jim Johnson, Tommy Burns' draw with O'Brien, Byrd's draw with Golota, Dokes' draw with Weaver or Rahman's draw with Toney in title fights ... except for the fact that Wilder FLOORED FURY TWICE in those fights ... and Lennox, Jack Johnson, Hasim Rahman, Michael Dokes and Chris Byrd didn't drop their challengers at all.

I know you guys like to **** all over Wilder, but the fact is Wilder's draw is a lot more impressive - against a much more difficult opponent - than all of those others.

Ignoring it completely shows bias. It happened.

 

You won't mind me leaving it at that then, allowing you to get on with gobshiting about Wilder by yourself.

There's no point carrying on exchanging posts on this topic, with one of Wilder's most rabid Majorettes.

I hope you and Deontay remain happy together.