Tokyo Douglas vs the Holyfield that beat Douglas

I seldomely judge a fighter on the basis of only one showing, as almost every man who ever putting on boxing gloves had both a "best" and "worst" performance.. Michael Dokes for example, was not a great fighter in my opinion, but on the night he gave Holyfield fits, truly showed up in exceptional form... I think that a focussed and well conditioned Douglas could have done the same, and really made his match with Evander an interesting evening. At the end of the day however, Holy was the better man, and I still feel that he would have prevailed in one way or another.

 

I think Holyfield showed a lot of dimension to his game against Douglas. Technically he did, but of course he didn't need to show as much grit as he did in tougher fights.

^ This really is funny. :yep
Firstly, Tubbs may have paid Lou Ferrigno to train him, but I dont think Tubbs will go down as one of Lou's personal training success stories.

That's the same Tubbs whose trainer Richie Giachetti walked out on a week before the fight complaining that Tubbs was training on "ice cream and chilli dogs".
That's the same Tubbs who was offered a $50,000 bonus if he could be decent enough to weigh in under 235 pounds, a modest request, but chose to risk forfeiting that bonus by being a pig and coming in at 238.
I mean, what more example of a slobbish undisciplined fighter do you need ?

And you have the cheek to hold that Tony Tubbs up as a moral example against the fat lazy Douglas, (who did much the same thing it is true). :rofl

And then in your next breath you accuse me of being biased .... atsch

How am I biased with Holyfield ?
I'm not the one saying there's anything wrong with Tyson's peak being judged those fights.
And I'm giving Holyfield the same treatment.

I'm just describing what I see. Foreman was **** against Morrison. I also believe the Holyfield and Stewart fights took something out of the old man. And why not ? I fully accept that tough fights can take something out of fighters. I accept that the Ruddock fights took something out of Tyson and Ruddock, for example.

And Foreman was lackluster against Morrison. Whatever the reason that's what I see. You call me biased, but you seem to think only Tyson (and Douglas, who beat prime Tyson) are allowed to have off-nights.

Anyway, Morrison does receive critcism on these boards from time to time for his turning his back and running away from Foreman. But, as i said, he wasn't even expected to win, that's why he didn't receive major flak at the time.

 

Dont play stupid, you know why he did this. He wasnt getting any of the money. He found out his manager offered him a 1/10 of that 50K so he came in overweight on purpose, besides that was a bit of a joke to make fun of how badly Douglas was prepared which was clear by his rotund shape. Tubbs at least, for the most part, was always round.

Foreman had a clear track record of having trouble with movers, that was the plan to beat him, thats why a limited fighter like Morrison was able to carry it out. It was a constant his entire comeback.

Sure Douglas was in top form when he faced Holyfield, are you trying to establish that now??

I think this is trying to establish Holyfield faced a tougher Foreman because the fight was closer, when in reality Holyfield made it a tougher fight, and that was pretty clear in the rounds that Holyfield chose to box rather than brawl.

 

No I think a lot of fighters had off nights. Foreman was pretty dam consistently inconsistent throughout his entire comeback depending on the opposition, he never dominated a group of well rounded fighters.

 

I dont know. Tubbs wasn't getting the bonus so he came in overweight on purpose ??
OK. If his manager (who is that ?) was planning to rob him why should that make him want to be out-of-shape ?
I mean, you're basically say Tubbs had the massive distraction of a thieving manager and was forced to come in fat to get back at his manager ? (on top of his trainer walking out on him a week before the fight because he was on "ice cream and chilli dogs").
If that's all true, it's a wonder if Tubbs' mind was even in the arena.

Tubbs was always fat, but he was 229 when he won the title. And a gross 244 when he lost it. 238 is too much. To fight Tyson he should have been in the best shape of his life.
The excuse, "he was always fat" doesn't really help him, because he was usually a very dreary fighter. He was a slob.

Douglas had weight issues his entire career too, but, yes, his 246 was the worst he'd been for a long time.
Douglas was a slob. So was Tubbs.

Maybe so.
But Holyfield impressed me more against Foreman than Morrison did anyway.

No. Where have I even implied that ?

 

I dont have the time to hunt down the story about Tubbs, but yes, he was in good shape, but purposely blew it knowing King and his manager had a side deal which he found out through a third party.

It was certainly a great fight as opposed to the Morrison fight, but my point was Holyfield didnt need to slug it out with Foreman, which goes back to my statement, that in my opinion, and again, its no knock on Holy, or a knock on your opinion, just that he wasnt as complete as he became as a heavyweight.

 

Firstly, I dont have the agenda that you ascribe to me. It's not like I'm actually take that point seriously. I'm certainly not thinking "Oh, Morrison did so much better against Foreman than Holyfield did, what can I say to explain that ?"
I mean, I'm not sure you even believe that.

Holyfield beat Foreman clearly.
Morrison beat Foreman clearly.

Holyfield-Foreman was a more impressive fight from both principals, a more impressive performance, and for the undisputed championship. Holyfield ripped into Foreman with some really good combos, definitely a fight worth re-watching.

I wasn't enthralled by Morrison's running tactics, and I thought Foreman fought a very tame fight from the opening bell.

^ That's my analysis. I think most people who watched those two fights would recognize what I'm saying.

If you have another view, that's fine too. But personally, I'm really not hearing all this "Morrison did better" stuff.

Also, Foreman's "second career" ran 10 years, from 1987 to 1997. From age 38 to age 48.
I happen to believe that he developed, peaked and declined in that period, as you'd expect from any fighter over such a time period, and certainly at such an age.
I happen to believe the Holyfield and Alex Stewart fights took something out of him, as I would if a 30 year-old had taken that punishment within a 12 month period. It shouldn't even be a controversial point.

 

And if that's the case, I dont see how that's any better preparation for fighting Tyson than whatever happened to Douglas for Holyfield.
Purposely making yourself out of shape to outwit a nasty manager is a ****ing mess of a preparation for a big fight !

The $50k bonus reports were in the media all week before the fight, and it was also reported after the weigh-in that King said he'd give Tubbs the money anyway because he believed Tubbs had made an effort and was "in shape".

Well, it didn't do him any harm.
And in Bowe 2 he slugged just as much as against Foreman.

Yes, I accept your opinion that Holyfield was at his best against Bowe. I say he was at his best against Douglas and Foreman.
And to me, that's no different to saying Tyson was at his best for Holmes, Tubbs, Spinks etc. or that Ali was at his best against Cleveland Williams, Terrell and Folley.

 

Your still not really getting my point. It wasn't comparing Holyfield and Morrison it was stating how easily Foreman could be beaten when exposing his weaknesses. Holyfield made Foreman look better than he had too that's all. It's not even such a big deal holy liked to slug.
Personally I don't think Morrison would have had anymore trouble facing George in 91 using the same fight plan, he was just too slow.
I also think Foreman had one of his best performances in his entire comeback in 97 or whatever year he fought Savarese, who was probably as good as Stewart.
As far as the Tubbs comment it's different Tubbs could put three pounds on in one day. Douglas was not fit physically or mentally and I think its pretty obvious he didn't try very hard.

 

Cmon Unforgiven. Bowe put a lot more pressure on Holyfield than Foreman did. He did fight somewhat similarly BUT, he didnt need to against Foreman, and was 99% of the time engaging George when they slugged, and in both fights, most of the time holy was getting the unecessary end of it.

 

Well, that's your take. You already know mine.
Holyfield fought the way he did.
Maybe Holyfield made himself look better than if he had pecked and run all night, and in the process Foreman looked better than he was too. I cannot say for sure.

Tubbs should have been in the 220s.
He was a slob, that's why Giachetti walked out a week before the fight.
That's why there was this talk of bonuses in the first place, and that's why there was apprehension on the part of the Japanese investors going in to the fight.
Tubbs was a fat slob with purse-haggling stories and issues over contracts following him all over this fight (... and i didn't even know about the one you mention). That's why they had Jose Ribalta on stand-by in case Tubbs tried blackmailing a bigger purse than agreed upon.
Tubbs was a fat slob and a cocaine fiend to boot.

Yes, Douglas was a slob too. That's been covered extensively in this thread. I'm not arguing against that.

 

Well, neither fight was a flawless performance.
I think you underestimated Foreman's ability and presence a bit though. He pressured everyone he fought.

Anyway, I never said Holyfield was flawless against Foreman. I do think he was at his best around that time. I also believe Foreman's overall fighting ability in his second career peak around there too.
Others share this view, and it's in no way leftfield or controversial view to hold.

 

I thought Tubbs looked pretty good against Tyson for the brief fight regardless of what really was the case. I certainly wouldn't trust anything don king said regarding giving anyone money.
Douglas on the other hand actually performed like he looked, like **** even before he quit.

 

I wasnt implying it was far off base. I just have a different opinion of Foreman than you.
As far as Bowe 2 Holy really had to fight that kind of fight to beat him, whereas against George he did not. It took a good mix of skills to beat a young strong fighter who was physically superior to both Foreman and Holyfield in a lot of ways.

 

Theres more to it, but heres something I found..

In 1987 Tubbs put together three wins to obtain a March 1988 title challenge to now undisputed heavyweight champion Mike Tyson, a promotion Don King staged in Tokyo. Tubbs was reportedly offered $50,000 to come in under 235 ibs, however his trainer hid this information from him. Realising his trainer was trying to steal the money from under his nose, Tubbs claimed he came in overweight on purpose. After winning the first round, Tubbs walked into a Tyson left hook towards the end of the second, ending the fight and leaving Tubbs on the canvas for several minutes.