Would you favor the 80s fighters in any of these matchups (at each man's respective peak)? Walcott v Witherspoon Ezzard Charles v Pinklon Thomas Archie Moore v Tony Tucker
I've actually been thinking about how 80s heavyweights would match up with 50s heavys. In these match ups I like the 80s heavies in at least two of them. Walcott vs Witherspoon is a close one, I could see Witherspoon putting out Walcotts lights with a right like Marciano did but a close match up. I like Thomas in top forum to win a decision over Charles with his jab, another close match up. I favor Tucker to win on points with Moore I think he'd have the size and boxing skills to out point Moore.
The argument against the 80s heavies will be the usual they were never real champions, just paper titleholders and who did they ever beat or even fight? But putting all that aside and matching them with the 3 golden oldies in straight up h2h fights, I do think they match up well with them and it wouldn't surprise me at all if they pulled off the wins. I particularly like the chances of Tim Witherspoon, who I think it very underrated.
The guys on the left have it. Moore would have the toughest time of it. That one could go to Tucker, actually.
Some smart selection with the 80s guys there. Your 50s guys are chosen because of their credentials. You basically had to pick them. The 80s guys were chosen from a sea of nearly weres, to pose a stylistic problem for the 50s guys. Even on that basis the 50s guys would likely take the series 2-1.
What stylistic problems do you believe that 80s fighters pose for the 50s ATGs? In which fights would you favor the 50s guys? I probably should have gone with Page, Dokes, or Weaver instead of Tucker, but other than Holmes and Tyson, I'm not sure that there were any heavies who had consistently higher average rankings than Witherspoon and Thomas that decade (at least by Ring standards).
The 80s fighters have a stylistic advantage in many cases, but a qualitative disadvantage. Michael Spinks demonstrated that, and he was not as good as the 50s guys. So where would I favour the 50s guys? I would favour them all by a ratio of something like 60/40, or 55/45.
I hate to be difficult, but I don't understand what Mike Spinks demonstrated wrt Tucker, Witherspoon, or Thomas. Am I missing something? And I'm not sure what stylistic advantages you believe the 80s guys possess exactly.
If you do not think that they possessed any stylistic advantages, then I bow to your wisdom. That leaves their accomplishments in the real physical universe, so it turns into a brutal mismatch!
I think the 80's heavys take those match ups. 2-1. I think a prime Charles negates Pink's jab, an takes a close decision. Spoon beats Walcott in a good fight, and Tucker decisions Moore.
