Heavyweight Boxing

The Nal · 18-10-2019 11:30am

While we're on the topic of fantasy, would've been interested to see Patterson if he was a bit heavier. Cus trained so very similar style to Mike. That leaping left hook was beautiful.

walshb · 18-10-2019 11:32am

yourdeadwright wrote: »

You really think all the bums Tyson beat in the 80's beat Patterson come on that's just silly ,
Mike first fight was what 1985 and his first 15 fights where against absolute nobody's , His 16th fight was against Jaco who had beaten Ruddock but had already lost 6 times himself,

You really think all them 16 guys beat Olympic and world champion Patterson ? I now Patterson won the Middle weight gold but he beat the Heavy weight silver medallist from the same year twice as a pro,

He wasn't the greatest by any stretch i'll give you that but to say all the bums Tyson fought beat him is just wrong,

Patterson was 190 lbs soaking wet for chrissake. He'd be giving away 30 lbs and several inches to most of the top 80s HWs. Plenty could easily find his chin, with 30 lbs on him. Liston, who would not be a huge HW in the 1980s blasted him away with ease....

Seriously, someone back me up here.....

This is getting silly now......

Floyd would get knocked out by big men such as Tucker and Bruno and Smith and Pinklon and Ruddock and others. He's too damn small.

Edit: Just realized. No, not all Tyson's victims beat Floyd. I didn't mean to interpret that, but all Mike's wins during his championship reign, which was mostly the 1980s, yes, thay all beat Floyd. Too big...I should have stressed this.

No way Floyd beats Tucker, Thomas, Smith, Berbick, Bruno, Holmes, Tubbs.......no way he beats Ruddock either, or Douglas....

They'd all dwarf him, and beat him up.

NoviGlitzko · 18-10-2019 11:43am

The Nal wrote: »

Apart from Buster Douglas.

And Holyfield, twice.

And Lewis*

*Yeah he was past it then, granted.

Just find bashing Joe Louis to make Tyson look artificially better very very odd behaviour. Thankfully you're in a minority of one.

Tyson was past it when D'Amato died and Kevin Rooney left his corner. His style went from movement-based to bulldozer very quickly. We'll never know how great he could have become if he kept his head together, but Tyson in his youth when hungry & focused is the best HW I've seen. I understand that you are judged by who you beat, but it's not Tyson's fault nobody could match him in his early years.

The Nal · 18-10-2019 11:44am

walshb wrote: »

Patterson was 190 lbs soaking wet for chrissake. He'd be giving away 30 lbs and several inches to most of the top 80s HWs. Plenty could easily find his chin, with 30 lbs on him. Liston, who would not be a huge HW in the 1980s blasted him away with ease....

Seriously, someone back me up here.....

This is getting silly now......

Floyd would get knocked out by big men such as Tucker and Bruno and Smith and Pinklon and others. He's too damn small.

Yes agree. Weak chin and was hit a lot.

I do think Pattersons contribution to the HW division was significant though. Brought a different style and legitimacy to the division coming from a lighter weight and the Olympics.

And yeah even Liston would be small ish now. There was surprise from a lot of people at the time seeing Ali bigger than him when they faced off before the bell.

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Tyson was past it when D'Amato died and Kevin Rooney left his corner. His style went from movement-based to bulldozer very quickly. We'll never know how great he could have become if he kept his head together, but Tyson in his youth when hungry & focused is the best HW I've seen. I understand that you are judged by who you beat, but it's not Tyson's fault nobody could match him in his early years.

Absolutely. The most excited fighter I've ever seen. Haven't stayed up late to watch anyone as much, always entertaining.

I'm really coming from a purely historical view. Not who could beat who, what he could've done etc.

walshb · 18-10-2019 11:46am

The Nal wrote: »

While we're on the topic of fantasy, would've been interested to see Patterson if he was a bit heavier. Cus trained so very similar style to Mike. That leaping left hook was beautiful.

Bit heavier wouldn't make too much difference. He was weak, and had no real chin.....

P4P he was very good, but this man v man. He also fought timid and scared when up against it vs Liston.

Liston was not huge, as regards what came after. He was bigger than Floyd, and he bullied him easily....Liston made look more scary than he really was

He met a bigger and taller and stronger Ali, (stronger than Floyd), and he was exposed...

Liston for me doesn't do all that well in a fantasy scenario vs other greats....

I see him getting brutalized vs the 90s big men, vs Foreman, vs. Tyson....

Liston does well against the smaller greats like Louis, Marciano and Dempsey.

walshb · 18-10-2019 11:48am

The Nal wrote: »

And yeah even Liston would be small ish now. There was surprise from a lot of people at the time seeing Ali bigger than him when they faced off before the bell.

Yes, I just posted on this, and apparently Liston commented on Ali's size when they were together.....it bothered him.

The Nal · 18-10-2019 11:57am

walshb wrote: »

Liston does well against the smaller greats like Louis, Marciano and Dempsey.

Yeah. Which is all he had. They weren't big men. Even Jack Johnson. 6ft, 14 stone. Marciano 5ft 10, Dempsey 6ft 1. Joe Louis was big at 6ft 2. Liston changed it in a way, fighters had to be bigger and stronger. Although Liston ended up being fairly pathetic.

Anyway, heres the GOAT

yourdeadwright · 18-10-2019 12:38pm

walshb wrote: »

Patterson was 190 lbs soaking wet for chrissake. He'd be giving away 30 lbs and several inches to most of the top 80s HWs. Plenty could easily find his chin, with 30 lbs on him. Liston, who would not be a huge HW in the 1980s blasted him away with ease....

Seriously, someone back me up here.....

This is getting silly now......

.

Edit: Just realized. No, not all Tyson's victims beat Floyd. I didn't mean to interpret that, but all Mike's wins during his championship reign, which was mostly the 1980s, yes, thay all beat Floyd. Too big...I should have stressed this.

No way Floyd beats Tucker, Thomas, Smith, Berbick, Bruno, Holmes, Tubbs.......no way he beats Ruddock either, or Douglas....

They'd all dwarf him, and beat him up.

I actually agree when you say "Floyd would get knocked out by big men such as Tucker and Bruno and Smith and Pinklon and Ruddock and others. He's too damn small "

My post was in reply to you saying all the men Tyson beat in the 80's would be beat Patterson,

walshb · 18-10-2019 12:42pm

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I actually agree when you say "Floyd would get knocked out by big men such as Tucker and Bruno and Smith and Pinklon and Ruddock and others. He's too damn small "

My post was in reply to you saying all the men Tyson beat in the 80's would be beat Patterson,

Yes, and I corrected that...not all Tyson’s 80s victims..

yourdeadwright · 18-10-2019 2:56pm

walshb wrote: »

Yes, and I corrected that...not all Tyson’s 80s victims..

I can live with that,
Could to have you back by the way always good topics to be discussed

walshb · 18-10-2019 3:13pm

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I can live with that,
Could to have you back by the way always good topics to be discussed

Agreed, but I wish more input and breakdown from some discussions, other than "No, that's nonsense." Not referring to anyone specifically....

But take the Tyson-Toney fight, which I actually broke down based on them as fighters; no replies other than Toney wouldn't beat him...

I'd like to hear why/how Mike beats Toney....

Strengths/weaknesses/areas......

I think it makes for a brilliant style match up....rock solid/defensively sound relaxed as fook Toney against a swarming killer.....
Areas like output and fitness intrigue me. Toney had a seriously brilliant boxing-cardio engine. Also had excellent volume when needed.

Tyson set a great pace, but punch-wise, he wasn't as voluminous as Toney; Mike like to clinch a lot and throw singles, doubles, more than free flowing combinations...

Same for other matches...

I detailed why I believe Tyson is bad for Ali, and some agreed, and those who didn't, just disagreed with no reasoning or logic, and no reasons why Ali beats Mike...

The forum has a lot of posts, but is lacking in detailed analyses of some topics....

The Nal · 18-10-2019 3:35pm

Ali sums it up himself from 3 mind 15. Simple as that really.

walshb · 18-10-2019 3:51pm

The Nal wrote: »

Ali sums it up himself from 3 mind 15. Simple as that really.

Ali not trusting his chin!!!!

yourdeadwright · 18-10-2019 4:12pm

walshb wrote: »

Agreed, but I wish more input and breakdown from some discussions, other than "No, that's nonsense." Not referring to anyone specifically....

But take the Tyson-Toney fight, which I actually broke down based on them as fighters; no replies other than Toney wouldn't beat him...

I'd like to hear why/how Mike beats Toney....

Strengths/weaknesses/areas......

I think it makes for a brilliant style match up....rock solid/defensively sound relaxed as fook Toney against a swarming killer.....
Areas like output and fitness intrigue me. Toney had a seriously brilliant boxing-cardio engine. Also had excellent volume when needed.

Tyson set a great pace, but punch-wise, he wasn't as voluminous as Toney; Mike like to clinch a lot and throw singles, doubles, more than free flowing combinations...

Same for other matches...

I detailed why I believe Tyson is bad for Ali, and some agreed, and those who didn't, just disagreed with no reasoning or logic, and no reasons why Ali beats Mike...

The forum has a lot of posts, but is lacking in detailed analyses of some topics....

ok for arguments sake,

We don't know how Toney's cardio would hold up at heavy weight, By the time he got there in real life he was fat and basically never fought anyone in the top guys to test it,

Also if he put the weight on by muscle would it have slowed down his reflex's and maybe also his gas tank,

Personal I don't think Toney would have taken the punch power of Tyson at heavy weight and Tyson would landed at a some stage ,

Toney was great at fighting in close but " Prime" Tyson speed and power was something he would have never of seen , I think Mike would hurt him

Now I lost interest in Toney late in his career but I only ended up watching his last boxing match before his UFC fight as I wanted to see what shape he was in, He got rocked by a guy called Mathew Greer ,He ended up wining but he was hurt , Now was that because of the weight or because of his years ? I don't know but I think Toney's style worked because of his body shape and weight, I think bigger stronger guys would have got to him and hurt him, ,

That just my opinion no wrong or right as we will never know

walshb · 18-10-2019 4:16pm

The Toney from Jirov (albeit at CW, but so what) and Holyfield I will take.....

The later version at HW is not beating Tyson...

BTW, of any fighter through history, Toney for me is probably the closest one of the most 'unknockoutable' there is....

His chin was granite, and his defenses and shoulder roll were superb. He wouldn't even get stopped from accumulation....

The Nal · 18-10-2019 4:33pm

walshb wrote: »

The Toney from Jirov (albeit at CW, but so what) and Holyfield I will take.....

The later version at HW is not beating Tyson...

BTW, of any fighter through history, Toney for me is probably the closest one of the most 'unknockoutable' there is....

His chin was granite, and his defenses and shoulder roll were superb. He wouldn't even get stopped from accumulation....

George Chuvalo too. A punchbag but a tough one.

Toney though, only non decision loss of his career was this.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xvme71

yourdeadwright · 18-10-2019 4:39pm

walshb wrote: »

The Toney from Jirov (albeit at CW, but so what) and Holyfield I will take.....

The later version at HW is not beating Tyson...

BTW, of any fighter through history, Toney for me is probably the closest one of the most 'unknockoutable' there is....

His chin was granite, and his defenses and shoulder roll were superb. He wouldn't even get stopped from accumulation....

I agree that his chin was granite and defence was unreal no one could question that , I just think it wouldn't transfer as well to fighting top dog heavy weights ,

As I said before Toney's body shape was perfect for how he fought in his weight class,

He's one boxer who actually doesn't get the credit he is due from the average punter ,

walshb · 18-10-2019 4:42pm

The Nal wrote: »

George Chuvalo too. A punchbag but a tough one.

Toney though, only non decision loss of his career was this.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xvme71

Chuvalo had a granite chin, but his issue was accumulation. You could TKO him....

Toney, you'd be lucky to land 2-3 in succession on him, and he also took a helluva wallop....

Too cute, tough, defensive, durable and resilient; he had it all, and a born innate fighter. Could box and slug for 12 rds...

walshb · 18-10-2019 4:43pm

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I agree that his chin was granite and defence was unreal no one could question that , I just think it wouldn't transfer as well to fighting top dog heavy weights ,

As I said before Toney's body shape was perfect for how he fought in his weight class,

He's one boxer who actually doesn't get the credit he is due from the average punter ,

Yeah, all the big proper HWs are too much for him, but all points wins.....nobody is stopping the man......

yourdeadwright · 18-10-2019 5:22pm

walshb wrote: »

Yeah, all the big proper HWs are too much for him, but all points wins.....nobody is stopping the man......

Anyone can be ko'd at heavy weight Toney included, Its a tale as old as time itself

walshb · 18-10-2019 8:50pm

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Anyone can be ko'd at heavy weight Toney included, Its a tale as old as time itself

Agreed. In theory, yes. I just would back Toney to not ever lose via KO-TKO, unless via TKO injury...

normanoffside · 18-10-2019 9:59pm

The Nal wrote: »

Yeah. Which is all he had. They weren't big men. Even Jack Johnson. 6ft, 14 stone. Marciano 5ft 10, Dempsey 6ft 1. Joe Louis was big at 6ft 2. Liston changed it in a way, fighters had to be bigger and stronger. Although Liston ended up being fairly pathetic.

To be fair, Johnson and Louis were 205-225lbs for most of their title fights.
Dempsey and Marciano were certainly modern day Cruisers.

Patterson and Frazier were really the last cruiser sized HW champs, but cruisers only came into fashion about 30 years ago (and 189lbs at the time).

Traditionally a good sized heavy was always 210-220lbs, it's only very recently that you'd get fit, tall and skilled Heavie's weighing in at 240lb+.
That's why i think it's unfair to compare modern day champions against guys of old, the modern guys almost have a genetic advantage.

normanoffside · 18-10-2019 10:11pm

By the by, I follow an Italian Boxing critic on Facebook, he is normally spot on but he recently did an all time top 10 European lb for lb list and had Lennox Lewis (Wlad at 8) at 7 and Primo Carnera at 6 :eek:

Just goes to show there is such huge variance opinions people have in boxing. Good to have debate.

US2 · 19-10-2019 12:18am

walshb wrote: »

Patterson was 190 lbs soaking wet for chrissake. He'd be giving away 30 lbs and several inches to most of the top 80s HWs. Plenty could easily find his chin, with 30 lbs on him. Liston, who would not be a huge HW in the 1980s blasted him away with ease....

Seriously, someone back me up here.....

This is getting silly now......

Floyd would get knocked out by big men such as Tucker and Bruno and Smith and Pinklon and Ruddock and others. He's too damn small.

Edit: Just realized. No, not all Tyson's victims beat Floyd. I didn't mean to interpret that, but all Mike's wins during his championship reign, which was mostly the 1980s, yes, thay all beat Floyd. Too big...I should have stressed this.

No way Floyd beats Tucker, Thomas, Smith, Berbick, Bruno, Holmes, Tubbs.......no way he beats Ruddock either, or Douglas....

They'd all dwarf him, and beat him up.

You can't use size soley as a reason he wins though. You'd have MT beat Fury for example, does size not matter there ?

walshb · 19-10-2019 8:15am

US2 wrote: »

You can't use size soley as a reason he wins though. You'd have MT beat Fury for example, does size not matter there ?

I didn’t just use size...

He’s too small, he is not near strong enough, and the names I mentioned would find his chin..

Actually, in some instances, you can just use size. Good big one beats a good little one.

Floyd was 185-190. Tyson’s championship victims had 30 + lbs on him.

If I said a LHW easily beats a SLW, 30 + lbs difference, why can’t size be a sole reason for me?

And there are times where size becomes less a factor.

Tyson was 220 lbs solid muscle. He would be giving away 30 lbs and 8 inches to Fury; I wouldn’t dismiss this, and I didn’t, but Tyson is not Patterson. He’s far far deadlier, hence my believing that he can take Fury out. And when you have the likes of Steve Cunningham dropping Fury, and some other nobodies wobbling him, then the thought of a 220 lbs prime Tyson getting to him doesn’t seem at all far-fetched.

Every situation can be broken down and analysed.

The Patterson one is mainly the size difference. He was not big enough, and was not strong enough, and also could be knocked out by bigger men.

Finally, there are times where a size advantage does not translate into an actual advantage. Mike’s shorter stature in a lot of fights caused his taller opponents issues, because Mike used his shorter stature to make it quite difficult for taller men to land more “normal” thrown shots. Of course, the fighter giving away height, reach and weight needs to be really talented to use his size disadvantage to his advantage. Tyson was very talented.

walshb · 19-10-2019 9:58am

Meant to add as well, that sometimes being “too big” can be a disadvantage at HW

Guys 250 + who are should really be a deal lighter, or even the naturally 250 + guys, whose size slows them that bit, and they are less mobile and fast as a man a fair bit lighter..

Look at AJ; I see his size advantage over Tyson as not at all a factor, because he’s not very quick on his feet, which would be a disaster against the smaller, fast attacking punching Tyson..AJs weight and physique also see him that bit slower upper body-wise, stiffer and more readable...

Of course, different fights mean different analyses...sometimes their size will see it advantageous for them.

BDI · 19-10-2019 12:51pm

Tyson to watch during his peak was amazing. He wasn’t at his peak long enough to be in the greatest of all time bracket.

His head movement was amazing at his best and a lot of the time when he did get hit nobody noticed, amazingly a few of his knockouts come after getting hit fairly hard right before but without watching closely you won’t see it. It was like he could counter your knockout punch after you hit him with it.

His footwork also doesn’t get the recognition it deserves people just speak mostly of his power, hunger and showmanship.
His speed and explosiveness was also like something you wouldnt see at heavyweight.

Pity he lost the head and didn’t stay at the top for a few more years. If he had I think the comparison with Ali would be fair.

squinn2912 · 19-10-2019 1:12pm

BDI wrote: »

Tyson to watch during his peak was amazing. He wasn’t at his peak long enough to be in the greatest of all time bracket.

His head movement was amazing at his best and a lot of the time when he did get hit nobody noticed, amazingly a few of his knockouts come after getting hit fairly hard right before but without watching closely you won’t see it. It was like he could counter your knockout punch after you hit him with it.

His footwork also doesn’t get the recognition it deserves people just speak mostly of his power, hunger and showmanship.
His speed and explosiveness was also like something you wouldnt see at heavyweight.

Pity he lost the head and didn’t stay at the top for a few more years. If he had I think the comparison with Ali would be fair.

I like this post very calm and measured.

Part of Ali’s greatness is how he reinvented and adapted himself to beat the odds. He was robbed of his prime years too where Tyson threw them away.

Good points about comparing from different eras earlier. In 25 years humans and training changes a lot.

BDI · 19-10-2019 1:33pm

squinn2912 wrote: »

I like this post very calm and measured.

Part of Ali’s greatness is how he reinvented and adapted himself to beat the odds. He was robbed of his prime years too where Tyson threw them away.

Good points about comparing from different eras earlier. In 25 years humans and training changes a lot.

I’m sure the medicine available to Tyson was much better than Ali’s medicine too. Sadly Dylan Wyhte is getting the best stuff ever available I’d imagine.

walshb · 19-10-2019 1:51pm

squinn2912 wrote: »

I like this post very calm and measured.

P.

I agree.

I will add, however, that even if Mike retired after prison, his body of work as regards record at the top, still beats a few historical names that get bandied about at HW; Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, Liston to name a few....

None of the above had as many actual championship victories as Tyson

Tyson would be on 10 wins and one defeat...clearing out the division, as well as unifying it..

Ali the GOAT.....

Holmes, an interesting one. Like Tyson, his record gets a fair bit of derision...

Cooney, Norton and Shavers his best wins....none are what I would label great...

I’d have no hesitation saying Mike beats all by KO.

Holmes then lost to a LHW, and the return match as well, and was knocked out by Tyson, where folks have no issue claiming he was well past it, while at the same time, bringing up Mike’s loss to Lewis, when Mike was clearly past it.

BDI · 19-10-2019 1:58pm

walshb wrote: »

I agree.

I will add, however, that even if Mike retired after prison, his body of work as regards record at the top, still beats a few historical names that get bandied about at HW; Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, Liston to name a few....

None of the above had as many actual championship victories as Tyson

Tyson would be on 10 wins and one defeat...clearing out the division, as well as unifying it..

Ali the GOAT.....

Holmes an interesting one. Like Tyson, his record gets a fair bit of derision...

Cooney, Norton and Shavers his best wins....none are what I would label great...

I’d have no hesitation saying that Mike beats all them by KO..

I wouldn’t disagree but depends on what point of his career you meet him at. I think a lot of the reason he looks to have wasted more peal time than other boxers is because his peak time started way younger. Having him looking like he was on the wane before he could use age as an excuse.

normanoffside · 19-10-2019 2:23pm

A timely video just popped up in my news feed. A few people might enjoy this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsuhRz3cpiI

BDI · 19-10-2019 10:36pm

Just watching the Tyson v Berrick fight now. That second knockdown where he is out on his feet and needs to be nudged over then the next one he tries to get up three times and falls back down.

Even knockouts had character back then

He really was a wrecking machine, to think wilder is this generations wrecking machine and peak Tyson could probably take wilders best on the chin while he ate his breakfast.

I know I exaggerate but Tyson would probably eat wilder and Joshua for his breakfast.

walshb · 19-10-2019 10:41pm

BDI wrote: »

I know I exaggerate but Tyson would probably eat wilder and Joshua for his breakfast.

I would be very confident he’d KO both...

90-100 times he beats them by clear KO..

squinn2912 · 19-10-2019 11:42pm

Gotta think that his work to the body would be far too much for either

squinn2912 · 19-10-2019 11:47pm

Would Fury have anything different to trouble him? He’d have a bit of footwork and huge reach but he only looks fast with guys on treacle

BDI · 20-10-2019 12:04am

squinn2912 wrote: »

Would Fury have anything different to trouble him? He’d have a bit of footwork and huge reach but he only looks fast with guys on treacle

I’m not a fan of fury’s style but I’m not sure fury could deal with the relentless pressure Tyson at his peak brings. It’s non stop plus he can hit after he is jabbed. Can furys light jab as he circles out of the way be enough to knock Tyson out of is stride? Maybe once or twice but not over a couple of rounds.

What I noticed tonight looking at Tyson too he is close to being both handed. In orthodox stance he can knock you out with his right or left. Even if you have your guard up. Frightening at his peak.
Against Lewis the explosiveness was gone it’s night and day.

squinn2912 · 20-10-2019 12:09am

BDI wrote: »

I’m not a fan of fury’s style but I’m not sure fury could deal with the relentless pressure Tyson at his peak brings. It’s non stop plus he can hit after he is jabbed. Can furys light jab as he circles out of the way be enough to knock Tyson out of is stride? Maybe once or twice but not over a couple of rounds.

What I noticed tonight looking at Tyson too he is close to being both handed. In orthodox stance he can knock you out with his right or left. Even if you have your guard up. Frightening at his peak.
Against Lewis the explosiveness was gone it’s night and day.

Great point well made about Tyson.

There are things Fury (or the other lads) could do and I’m not so sure it would be a cake walk for mike but I think he gets through and if he gets through once at that peak standard it’s game over

normanoffside · 20-10-2019 12:17am

What i Noticed about the Tyson Douglas highlights was the sheer pace of it. Douglas was still fighting like a lightweight in the 10th.
It's not like that any more. Modern day heavies are bigger but definitely not as fit.

BDI · 20-10-2019 12:35am

normanoffside wrote: »

What i Noticed about the Tyson Douglas highlights was the sheer pace of it. Douglas was still fighting like a lightweight in the 10th.
It's not like that any more. Modern day heavies are bigger but definitely not as fit.

If you watch all of Tyson’s fights you will see he is relentless going forward, up until around Douglas where in the first round he goes forward in bursts then gets hit when he backs off. It’s nothing genius by Douglas I think he knows something. There is a point when they are both in the ring in the build up and it zooms to Tyson and you can see around his eyes are red, his corner all seem placid, the head movement and footwork is still there at the start but the bit of extra level is gone.

Fair play to Douglas and his corner for spotting it and capitalizing. Factor in as well Douglas is coming off a ten rounder and Tyson hasn’t had to fight more than a round or two in a few years as far as I remember.

normanoffside · 20-10-2019 12:57am

BDI wrote: »

Fair play to Douglas and his corner for spotting it and capitalizing. Factor in as well Douglas is coming off a ten rounder and Tyson hasn’t had to fight more than a round or two in a few years as far as I remember.

Yep, the commentary on the video I posted referred to Tyson spitting from Rooney because he didn't see the point of training for 12 round fights when he was blowing everyone away in 2 rounds.

That was probably the difference, but Douglas' pace in the 9th and 10th was still impressive.

BDI · 20-10-2019 1:03am

Seen in a stat the odds were something like 40-1 for a Douglas win. Add don King into the mix and we could be only scratching what really went on. Who knows.

Mantis Toboggan · 20-10-2019 7:55am

squinn2912 wrote: »

Great point well made about Tyson.

There are things Fury (or the other lads) could do and I’m not so sure it would be a cake walk for mike but I think he gets through and if he gets through once at that peak standard it’s game over

Plus there's proper drug testing these days.

BDI · 20-10-2019 8:09am

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Plus there's proper drug testing these days.

In fairness I’d say both would have to be tested and there is not proper drug testing these days there is a drug test, which specialists and steroid dealers call an idiot test.

walshb · 20-10-2019 11:25am

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Plus there's proper drug testing these days.

Fury must have missed this, so!

squinn2912 · 20-10-2019 1:05pm

walshb wrote: »

Fury must have missed this, so!

I think drug cheating is possibly worse now than At any other time

normanoffside · 20-10-2019 1:08pm

squinn2912 wrote: »

I think drug cheating is possibly worse now than At any other time

I think we are only getting positives now as they are testing them for the first time.
I have seen several comments from Champion boxers retired about 10 years ago saying they were never tested once in the careers.

walshb · 20-10-2019 1:08pm

squinn2912 wrote: »

I think drug cheating is possibly worse now than At any other time

May be, but back when there was next to no testing, a case could be made.....

walshb · 20-10-2019 1:09pm

You take even the great Ali and Frazier...in Manila you would wonder if maybe there was some kind of “help” there to enable what they showed..

normanoffside · 20-10-2019 1:13pm

walshb wrote: »

You take even the great Ali and Frazier...in Manila you would wonder if maybe there was some kind of “help” there to enable what they showed..

I don't think doping was even illegal back then, it certainly wasn't tested.

You could say even if they ere taking stuff it was fair game as there were no rules against it.

Heavyweight Boxing

Comments