Rematches that were better than the originals

Rematches are supposed to suck, but they don't always

Ali-Frazier III (much better than an of the previous)
Mosley-Wright II (The first was one-sided, this was an even one and a very good fight too)
Lewis-Holyfield II (also a closer fight and more action-packed)

add some more

 

Does this include this thread?

I'm sure we've done this one before.

 

ruiz-holy II was better than the first ( but of course the III was much much worse than the previous two )

Golota-Bowe II was better imo than the first one

 

Norris - Brown 2

:bears:

 

Muhammad-Lopez 2
Chacon-Edwards 2
Chacon-Limon 4
Tyson-Ruddock 2

 

vasquez-marquez
ramirez-rosario

 

Arguello-Escalera 2

 

Serious? Damn, I should have opened Do we need a superheavyweight division -thread instead

 

What would it matter? It's not on the first two pages at least. It's a good thread...even if it's not original. :nono:

 

Ali-Frazier 3 may not qualify for a couple reasons:

1. It wasn't a rematch, per se, but the last fight in a trilogy. Slightly different IMO

2. It's debatable among many (myself not included) that it's a better fight than the first one.

 

Holmes-Shavers II: It was looking like the first fight until Shavers nearly decapitated Holmes in the 7th round.

 

Tarver Roid II was better than I ::

 

There is only one answer. LaMotta-Dauthille II. Thread over.

 

Just by reading some of the posts here i came to think that most times the second fight in a trilogy is often the weakest one.

Ali-Frazier 2
Barerra-Morales 2
Gatti-Ward 2
Leonard-Duran 2

Now that i think of it there are quiet a few exceptions as well. Never mind.

 

Actually the thread asks for rematcheS (plural)

Therefore even though your example may be one of the better ones, it does not equal a "thread over".

 

There are already other rematches. And they are inferior to LaMotta-Dauthille II. Therefore, the thread is over.

 

if one could BAN themselves , would you do the right thing?

 

Leonard-Duran 3 was even worse.

 

Yeah that was pretty sad. I think Tarver-Jones 3 was even more entertaining than that.

 

Eubank-Watson II despite the tragic end to the fight was far better than the first.

 

Good one.

 

Bowe-Golota 2

But on a whole,rematches in general mostly do suck. But about 1 out of every 5 will be good!!

 

that's because in the first meeting they don't know what to expect from each other..they go balls to the wall not sure if the other guy can hurt them if he can they will most likely be wary of their power in the rematch..and in the first meeting they don't know what the other will do..they don't know their tricks and moves...but in the rematch they're prepared for every move cuz they've already seen it all thus making it less unpredictable and exciting..

 

larios vasquez

 

Good observation and very true...but Leonard-Duran 2 is an unfortunate example to use, because the third fight in that trilogy was terrible.

 

END OF THREAD!!!!!!!! :bears:

Best example ever!

The first fight was ok...the rematch was one of the best fights in history!!

 

Bowe-Holyfield 2
DLH_Chavez 2
Maybe Gatti-Robinson (borderline)
________
Honda Torneo

 

hmmm........

Bowe Holyfield 2 was certainly more competitive...AND it was a very good fight in it's own right but...

"FAN MAN" spoiled the fight and in addition to that, the 1st fight had more drama and excitement.

 

Moorer-Holyfield II

So much happened between their fights that you don't usually think of them as a fight serie, but the second fight was better

 

Lewis - Holyfield II: Certainly no classic, but 'better' than the first in that there was some conjecture as to the result.

Also, the Lewis -McCall rematch was a far greater 'spectacle' than the first fight...