Got a question for observers who lived through the times discussed or have knowledge based on the boxing publications from the era. 1. Muhammad Ali still had a WBC belt in 1969. Were people still considering him the champ that year? Ring Magazine did until the Frazier Ellis matchup a year later, but what about the public? He was banned, had a court case and didn't fight for 2 years. Frazier became the universally recognized champion in 1970, but what was the perception between 67 and 70? Was the throne considered vacant, or was Ali still seen as the king? 2. Foreman was the universally recognized champion after he beat Moorer but ultimately lost this distinction after the lackluster fight with Schulz he should have lost and vacating his last alphabet belt. He still held the claim to the lineage, but since he was fighting nobodies, it was seen more like a joke. In 1996 Mike Tyson unified WBC & WBA. Was he seen as a clear top dog? Was he universally recognized as the champ? Was Holyfield seen as such after beating Mike and unifing with Moorer? He technically held a claim to every alphabet belt, even tho Tyson dropped the WBC strap to fight him.
No one else challenged Foremans status as lineal champ. During Foremans reign no one defended a title twice until Moorer in early 1997. Holyfield beat Moorer 2 weeks before the end of Foremans reign. Lennox lost to McCall before Foremans reign and did not regain his belt until early 1997. Holyfield did not deserve a title shot before Tyson as he had 3 losses in his previous 7 fights. Heres a breakdown of Foremans reign that makes what happened make sense. 1)Foremans 1st defense was Schulz who got 2 title shots in a row after losing to Foreman. Foreman got stripped of fighting the WBA for failing to fight his mandatory Tony Tucker not because Schulz was an unacceptable opponent. 2)Foreman waited for the division to clear up. When that didn't happen Foreman tried to make the Moorer rematch. This fell through and Foreman was stripped of his IBF belt. At this point Foreman had been out for a year and Foreman scrambled to find another opponent. 3)Foreman fought Grimsley. Grimsely was an awful contender but the WBA ranked him 9th and the WBC had given him a regional belt for beating opponents who were 0-7 and 11-34. The alphabet bodies made Grimsley an option. 4)Foreman fought Savarese. Savarese was the USBA champ and that was considered the strongest regional belt. USBA was so strong they started calling themselves the IBF after a few years. There had been 10 USBA champs before Savarese 8 of them got title shots. Savarese beat Buster Mathis Jr for the NABF title. Mathis's only prior loss was to Tyson who'd also gotten a title shot for beating him. Title defenses against regional champs have always been normal mainly NABF/USBA/EBU/Commonwealth. 5)Foreman fought Briggs. He had agreed to fight Lennox Lewis if he won. Lennox beat Akinwande after Foreman v Savarese and Golota 6 weeks before Foreman v Briggs so Foreman tried to make the fight pretty much right away. Briggs was the most random of Foremans 4 title defenses. No 0, regional titles, ranking or major wins. However seeing how Briggs did against Lennox and the career he went on to have he was the best of the bunch. "In 1996 Mike Tyson unified WBC & WBA. Was he seen as a clear top dog? Was he universally recognized as the champ?" Going to answer this seperate because Tysons reputation wasn't tied to boxing results. Due to Tyson being Tyson the average person probably thought Tyson was the champion when he didn't hold a belt. Tyson only held the WBA&WBC a few weeks before he got stripped for fighting Holyfield instead of Lennox. On a strictly boxing basis Tyson and then Holyfield were the 4th most credible HW champs at the time. The Holyfield v Tyson fights are the 2 most famous fights in American history. Holyfields the "ear guy". I do not think Tyson would have fought Foreman or Bowe.
Foreman was still the lineal champion, but no one considered him a top dog from 95 to 97. HBO called his title "imaginary". If you asked who was the HW champion at that time, it would be Tyson, Holyfield or Lewis. My question was, if any of them, especially Holyfield after unification with Moorer, gained universal recognition.
