What if buster Douglas had beaten tucker

The thing about Tucker beating Douglas is that Douglas often beat himself throughout his career, so those wins cancel out and give Douglas the better resume.

 

June 1988 Douglas beats Williams

Feb 1989 Douglas beats Berbick

July 1989 Douglas beats McCall

Unless you think there is a whole years difference between December and January or June and July there is nothing wrong in saying a year. But for the pedantic out there let me say There is 13 months between Williams and McCall. And now that I have said it I shall repeat, who else that Tyson fought was racking up wins like that under that schedule?

 

I think Holmes cancelled himself out in 1988 by not having a tune up having not beat a ranked heavyweight since the 1985 Carl Williams fight.

I think Tubbs cancelled himself out by blowing his bonus to come in shape, not beating a ranked contender for two years and for being so appalling that his coach walked out on him ahead of the Tyson fight.

I think Thomas practically cancelled himself out too in 1987 since he had not beat a rated guy since the 1985 weaver fight.

 

Thomas was top 5 and two or three years removed from being pfp. Most think he lost the title due to lack of focus, not age or sucking.

Holmes beat a better fighter in the 90s than Douglas had in his pre Tyson career.

Can Bonecrusher, Berbick, and Biggs join the three a year club?

It's not that I think Douglas was bad head to head in Tokyo. He was the least qualified though.

 

if the title was not so diluted there is no way Pinklon could have made it back into the rankings without knocking off a contender to get back into it. It used to be that you knocked somebody off their rating to achieve a ranking. Pinklon got a shot out of old times sake. Tyson had already beat the man who ended his time as an elite fighter.

Who Holmes beat in the next decade is not relevant to 1988.

I think Bonecrusher was relevant to the current scene because he had just crushed Witherspoon. Without belts being an issue Tyson had to really beat Smith. So Smith was a better opponent than everyone but Berbick. Berbick was worth beating too since he had exposed the troubled Pinklon Thomas and had always been a bit of a danger man since he had beat David Bey, John Tate, an unbeaten Greg page an unbeaten Mitch Green. Biggs was more worthy than some challengers because although he wasn't beating real contenders he was an ex Olympian and undefeated. So yes I put them all as being better prepared to challenge for a title than Tubbs, Holmes and Thomas. Smith and Berbick were the real guys to beat at that time and I think the others needed to match this in order to qualify. Douglas Qualified and so did Williams. Biggs and Bruno were a bit behind.

he was the least well known I grant you. And that is where you are getting mixed up. Qualified and well known are two separate things.

in actual terms of being prepared and suitable Douglas actually was the most qualified of any of Tysons challengers because he could still beat contenders. Holmes, Tubbs and Thomas did not prove they still could.

 

Thomas never left the rankings.

 

Pinklon NEVER proved he could still beat a contender. To be one you have to still be able to beat one surely?

Can you tell me who the rated contender was that Thomas knocked off to maintain a ranking between losing to Berbick and fighting Mike Tyson?

Nine times knocked out Danny Sutton had just been knocked out by both Damiani and Tyrell Biggs so it can't have been him that helped Thomas maintain his ranking?

Or William Hosea who had lost four times in the last four years with his best win being over 8-26 Aron Draper and most recent win being over 0-9 Charles Jamison who retired four fights later without ever having won a fight?

It puzzles me that Thomas maintained a ranking Whilst keeping warm on Tyson undercards meeting two guys from the loser circuit. Whilst at the same time out of favour Tim Witherspoon was racking up harder wins over undefeated prospects among an 11 fight winning streak during Tysons reign including wins over Ribalta, Anders Eklund, Truth Williams and Mike Williams.

Jack Dempsey had to beat Jack Sharkey to fight Tunney again. Ali had to beat Quarry and Bonavena to fight Frazier and Norton, Frazier and everyone else to fight Foreman.

 

You seem ignorant of how boxing economics works. Boxers in line for title shots typically either wait or fight tune-ups. Since Douglas had done so little, he had to earn his ranking. He happened to get his shot soon thereafter. Had Tyson gone a different direction, Douglas likely would've sat in line for a year or two. It happens all of the time with heavyweights.

 

Your going off track a little here. Let's just stick to the point. Douglas was still the best equipped "in form" challenger of Tysons title reign. A lot of Tysons other challengers were not as qualified.

We have been all around the houses looking at Tony Tubbs recent form or lack of, Larry Holmes coming out of retirement totally unprepared, pinklon Thomas being kept on ice ticking over on bogus mismatches, Tony Tuckers financial crisis and law suits ahead of the fight with Tyson... and the initial point still remains, Tony Tubbs high point was beating Greg Page. That's it. And this is a fete Douglas equals right after then improves on (after a blip with Tucker) by adding wins to his resume over Williams, Berbick and McCall. In all that time Tubbs never matches even his Greg Page Form to beat another serious opponent before meeting Tyson. Neither does Thomas regroup against that calibre of opponent. Holmes? He should have stayed at home.

 

Tyson was a good champion. But everyone got so carried away with him that there was not enough analysis on where each challenger was in his career when Tyson fought them. With hindsight Tyson fought everyone that he could - apart from Witherspoon - and did a very good job. In truth when he lost he lost to a good challenger, there should be no shame in that. Tyson wound up losing to the best challenger albeit with the lowest profile.