Heavyweight title in 80s WITHOUT Tyson

wisdom.

 

Not quite. Spinks held the IBF belt but was stripped because he refused to fight Tony Tucker as Spinks opted for the big payday against Cooney instead. Tucker and Douglas then fought for the vacant IBF belt which is why Tucker had it when Tyson came calling.

Spinks never ducked Tyson. I know Butch Lewis made negotiations difficult and it slightly delayed the bout but Spinks didn't duck him. And it certainly isn't what Spinks didn't have an alphabet belt in 1986. Keep in mind, Spinks was the IBF champion during all of 1986.

 

ok, my bad

 

:bears:

Whether or not Holyfield gets a chance to unify is the only question. If he does, he beats all those chumps.

 

word. Like they stole something...

 

Wow. What a division that must have been :: Cruiserweight. ::

 

Holyfield was an excellent fighter. One of the greatest ever, in fact.

 

I remember being in awe of how Evander naturally built himself up from being a scrawny cruiserweight to a HW monster with hardwork and a great nutritionist.

The silly things you believe when you're young(er).

 

::

Fields could fight though. An underrated technician too.

 

word.

Wisdom once again.

 

The dude was a throwback to some degree. Great combination puncher. Amazing balance. And he attacked. I could see him fitting in with Walcott, Charles, and Louis.

 

He would have had TREMENDOUS fights with either of those three. Marciano too.

 

My biggest problem with Tony Tucker is that - as bad as was the division back then - he had the softest record of the bunch. Most of the rest of the lot was mediocre (in comparison to traditional Top 10 heavyweight contenders), but they at least fought each other. Tucker managed to somehow avoid facing an entire generation of heavyweights, save for Tyson and I suppose Buster Douglas.

As steve_dave already noted, it's almost impossible to envision any scenario other than the belts being passed around every 15 minutes, especially if Spinks retires after the Cooney fight. Maybe Larry Holmes even enjoys a second tour as champ, though at that point entirely possible that the reign doesn't last very long.

Scary to think how long it would've lasted, and how boxing would've suffered in the process.

 

I wouldn't completely discount the possibility, but considering Holmes struggled against an very inexperienced Witherspoon and should have lost to Carl Williams, I think he would have had a tough time with these guys at the later age.

And you kind of hit on my primary reason for picking Tucker. It's mostly because of that unknown. Unlike the other guys in the group, he didn't beat one guy and then lose to another two fights later. That was because he didn't face the same competition the other guys did.

Again, Tucker's primary problem was that he was injury prone. It seemed like everytime he took a step up in competition, he would get hurt and have to take a step back. He's also another horror story of having your father as manager and trainer.

 

Tubbs might be the most talented of the lot

Of course if he was undisputed champ, he'd pile on the pounds and lose in his first defense (like when he lost his alpha strap to Tits Witherspoon, another guy who's up there with Tubbs). Nobody's consistent enough to hold on to the title.

In other words, I agree with steve_dave's post

 

I said that in one of the first posts in this thread. :kick:issed:

 

All I could find was this :notallthere:

 

What's wrong with that!?

 

every one of those guys on a good night give Holyfield hell and best of 3, they probably win one as well.

 

Let's be honest about Holyfield. The dude was a beast but he also struggled against guys like Dokes, Cooper and Moorer. He could struggle on any given night against any of the front runners from the mid 80's.

 

negative.

 

Negative. He may "struggle" in some parts of the fights but none of those guys would beat him. A 37 year old Larry Holmes could have possibly beaten Evander but that's about it.

 

Negative. If past prime Dokes and past prime Cooper could threaten his victory that much then I can see how prime Spoon or Pinklon Thomas would do the same. Holyfield was not as consistent as Lennox or Holmes nor did he have the equalizing power of Tyson

 

Ah...sorry...Witherspoon yes. No one else though.

 

Douglas, Tucker & Tubbs at their best are real tough fights, too.

 

Spinks might well be too

 

Douglas, yes. Holyfield beats Tucker easily IMO. It's a styles thing.

Tubbs? He makes it competitive in parts...but ultimately Holyfield wins at least 8 rounds.

 

nah. Holyfield's style is a foil to spinks' awkwardness.

 

Difficult to predict. If Spinks can take Holy's power I think it goes to the wire. OTOH, Holy might win by KO in the first half of the fight.

I really imagine Tubbs slickness, in fighting and handspeed posing Holy allot of problems.

 

In my opinion Tucker would be the absolute worst match up. He actually had decent power and he was huge. Plus the dude was capable of taking some punishment.

The bottom line is that Holyfield struggled and LOST to guys that weren't as good as prime Spoon, Williams and Tucker. To think he couldn't lose 1 out of 3 to any of these guys is a mistake, I think.