Jump to content

3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?


WelshDevilRob
 Share

Recommended Posts

No real clear standout considering virtually all of them could never maintain a decent run.Holy didn't move up until the very end of the decade either.I suppose I'd lean towards Witherspoon.

 

I agree, Don, I thought about Holyfield, but he was a Cruiser until late-1988, and Witherspoon was on the scene and won two titles from the point at which he challenged Holmes in his narrow 1983 defeat in just his 16th fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest names of the 80s heavyweight scene were: Mike Tyson, Larry Holmes, Tim Witherspoon, Frank Bruno, James Smith, Trevor Berbick, Tony Tubbs, Tony Tucker, Gerry Cooney, Michael Spinks, Tyrell Biggs, Carl Williams, Donovan Ruddock, James Buster Douglas, Pinklon Thomas, James Broad, Mike Weaver, Greg Page, James Tillis.

 

After Tyson and Holmes it's a tricky one as there is no real stand out name. I'd say Tim Witherspoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Micheal Dokes was absolutely awesome. However, drugs got the better of him, and his promiscuity did not help. He would party with women and not train as he should have. Watch his blitz of Weaver and then watch the combinations early in their rematch, the speed was phenomenal!

Even with a long time out of the ring, with drug problems etc, he still almost made Holyfield quit(Evanders own words) and no one has less quit in him than Evander.

I hated Bowe for ducking Lewis and opting to defend against Ferguson and a totally shot Dokes, especially after he and Rock Newman had ridiculed Holyfields choice of opponents. Here was Holyfield, a small guy, agreeing to fight Foreman and Holmes, and here was this really big guy, choosing the weakest title defences possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Witherspoon was massively underrated too. He had very bad problems with Don and Carl King, so he had long lay offs and often did not train as good as he should have. He beat a peak Tillis in 1rd, whereas Tyson struggled with a washed up Tillis. I don't think anyone noticed and certainly no one made a fuss, but Tim could have kept his title v Bonecrusher, if the ref had called the knock down that he scored. Smith was rushing, knowing Tim was not focused and that he had him hurt, and he got caught and went down briefly, but it was ignored by everyone in the excitement....including the commentators

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Hi Rob. Just wanted to say that Spinks should not be in anyone's list as a top heavyweight in the 80's. This was his resume, he beat Cooney, who had been in retirement on and off for years, and was coming off a ko loss, he beat Tangstad (who?), he beat an old Holmes, but then lost the rematch, only to be given a gift decision, and then was KO'd in less than a round. An absolutely great light heavy though.

Also Cooney should never be on any list that is discussing greats. The couple of guys he beat that were names, were totally washed up when he fought them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

--- But Spinks was the dominant LH of his era and moved to whomp Holmes with Rock's jock strap twice, again it's in the books.

 

OK you only say Holmes won the rematch without any support. Sure, and some say Spinks didn't win the first bout, but let's be clear, he was more the Ring champ than Holmes who was only recognized when he beat an obviously sick Ali, a version of Ali I refused to ever watch because of the cruelty of those keeping him propped up when he was done. Cooney could be said to be better against Spinks, certainly he had the same layoff from fighting as when he fought Holmes, over a full year. He was never hurt against Holmes, only collapsing from fatigue because of poor development by his trainers. Me thinks you're a tad jealous Spinks actually whomped Cooney much easier than Holmes who was behind on the cards until Cooney was penalized for all those lowblows.

 

Since this is a discussion as to the 3rd best heavy of the 80s, but forth a couple of better ones and tell us why their better than Spinks. I already put in for Tony Tucker who was undefeated before Tyson and beat the guys who first beat Tyson and Lewis, ie McCall and Douglas. If he hadn't been sold down the river by DKing and his own daddy, he might well have lasted considerably longer as nobody else had his talent save a Tyson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

--- Tony Tucker best to best would have whooped Holmes 3 of 3 times with at least one KO.

 

He was just that much more talented, bigger, stronger. Big Pants Lar never fancied a unification against the other champs of his era.

 

Yesss! Finally someone else than me recognises TNT's worth. :thumb: He was a complete package: huge, good boxer, hard puncher, durable, everything. He only lost to Tyson in his first 49 fights and on points!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Apparently we have to choose Tucker, because that is who a certain admin has decided is the winner.

Be aware also, that if there is a thread for the greatest heavy of all time, we have to choose Joe Louis.......despite him being known for defending against bums of the month, and a few light heavies, oh and having a VERY weak chin...... and his losses won't count for various biased reasons. However all of Larry Holmes losses stand, despite him, coming out of retirement and being out of shape

Edited by chaconfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

I am fully aware Spinks was the dominant LH, however we are discussing HW's.

You seem to be on a mission to diss me, catch me out, prove me wrong, shoot me down, label me biased, argue every point I make etc, so I feel like I should ignore all your posts, but hey ho, here is my reply. I say Holmes beat Spinks in the rematch "without any support", Oh you mean that it being listed as one of the most controversial losses in HW history is just MY opinion only do you?

Why would I be jealous that Spinks put away Cooney faster than Holmes did? Cooney was 25-0 when Holmes fought him. When he fought Spinks he had been retired and had fought three times in five years! Did I ever say I was a Holmes fan? Did I ever say I was not a Spinks fan? NO I DID NOT. You are the biased one, you are always looking for ways to put fighters down, not me. You won't catch me calling any boxer lard ass.

Holmes beat some tough unbeaten guys, Snipes was 22-0 Bey 14-0 Williams was 16-0 Witherspoon was 15-0, Ocasio was 13-0, Leroy Jones was 24-0, Scott Frank was 20-0, Frazier was 10-0, Cooney was 25-0, even when old and washed up he beat Mercer 18-0, add to this list Shavers twice, Leon Spinks, Norton, Weaver, Berbick only had 1 loss, Bonecrusher only had 1 loss and M. Spinks was also unbeaten, yet an old Holmes beat him too, even if it was unofficial. Some going for a lard ass don't you think?

I am NEVER biased, I dislike some boxers, like Tyson (as I said earlier) but always give credit where it is due.

Tucker was an excellent boxer, and I was amazed that cruiserweight Hide, stopped him in two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

--- Lardass Larry certainly deserves disrespect as that was what he mostly spewed in his HOF induction.

 

He never held more than one title and holds a poor record against other champs. Could care less about the undefeated novices he beat.

 

If you project that as impugning you, I can't help you. I'm here to talk boxing. He was game as a fighter, but never really stepped up until it was too late.

 

Terrible inferiority complex too. Rocky, Ali, George, Tyson all so much better and he couldn't handle it. I sure he was a good family man, so that counts for a lot more outside boxing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

If George was so much better, I am really confused as to why he simply would not fight a fellow hall of famer, who was of a similar age. Marciano better than Holmes! Lol, he beat a few washed up guys, a few light heavies, and was even decked by a VERY old light heavy. Holmes had a poor record against other champs? I just listed 9 former or future champs he beat, plus a load of unbeaten top contenders. OMG you never stop with your hating. If it isn't Wilder you are hating on, it is Ali's WEAK chin(and this is despite that fact that he fought the biggest punchers of any champ in history and NONE of them stopped him) or Holmes, or someone/something else. Yet when it is a fighter you admire, you ignore all the faults, excuses, weaknesses, connected to their careers. You criticized Ali's chin, ignored the intangibles that I countered with, but defended Louis' MUCH weaker chin. You say you are here to talk boxing.....am I not? I would say you are here to ARGUE boxing, and love that you are empowered by the fact that you are admin. How dare anyone stand up to me? How dare anyone come on a site where I am admin,and dare to defend boxers I hate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

--- Re: " Holmes had a poor record against other champs?"

 

Not gonna bother refuting the rest of your stuff, some of which is accurate but all out of context.

 

You could look it up instead of looking silly, Norton never won a world title match, he won the eliminator against Young and was installed as WBC champ when they stripped Ali for not rematching Norton, but let's say Holmes officially won the sparest, most controversial split decision possible against the newly installed WBC champ, one victory over an existing champ.

 

Then he loses his illbegotten IBF title to the existing LH champ, Mike Spinks and loses the rematch, so now officially he's 1-2 against current champs. Knocked out by Tyson, beaten by Mr. Field, now he's 1-4, then beaten by McCall, so now he's 1-5 and retires only to comeback moaning about George because George was so popular and making all that money he was jealous over.

 

He was so jealous of Butterbean that he called him out in a fight nobody ever asked for. Bean who had never been past 4 rds put him on the run the whole fight and knocked him down in the last rd, the 10th. Had Bean been the one knocked down to get up to grab the ropes to flee from the ref's instructions, that would have been an automatic KO of Bean. Instead the ref allowed Larry his extra time to regroup his spaghetti legs and wounded pride that allowed him to survive the round to the distance.

 

His record is and always shall be 1-5 against any current champs that he fought Jack, I can't make it any simpler for you. If you want to boost him up with washed up old champs and future champs in training pants, that's fine, that also is part of the record just like Butterbean, but just like Ali getting beat by Leon, no heavyweight champ ever gets knocked down by Butterbean much less fights him or disrespects him like Larry did, but so it is for Larded Lar and forever shall be no matter how much you want to cover up his obvious weaknesses and frailties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Things I say are out of context are they? Everything you say is on the mark is it? None of those guys I listed are decent opponents for a champ to defend against according to you, yet for some strange reason, a guy you admire, is allowed to fight what are universally referred to as bums of the month! Is THAT out of context, or should I not point out your inconsistencies?

Your crusade against me, is due to the fact that I proved you wrong, in previous messages, but you can add to that hatred (which I mentioned previously also) now, with me proving how biased, and hypocritical you are, and yet another example is how you ignore the fact that he was robbed in the Spinks rematch. Guarantee that if it was Louis that was robbed, you would not fail to mention it. Fact is the robbery was against Louis, v Walcott....but let us not mention that hey, we would not want to upset the admin, would we!

The records show that those guys I listed WHERE world champions. I never mentioned Norton was a champ. I listed 9, but that was because I counted Weaver twice, and although he fought him twice, it does not count......or maybe it does, when it is you making a case for someone. Holmes cannot help the fact that boxing politics changed from the time of Louis, and the titles became fractured.

 

You called me jealous in an earlier message, now you are calling Holmes jealous. Yet you give no explanation as to why George would not fight him. Surely he was the perfect opponent.....by your definition, a fat, useless, couldn't beat any decent opponent, has been. You actually want to judge Holmes on his inability to beat current champs, even though he was old and as you love to say, fat, and all the guys that he beat who went on to win a title don't count, nor the ones who had recently lost their title?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Things I say are out of context are they? Everything you say is on the mark is it? None of those guys I listed are decent opponents for a champ to defend against according to you, yet for some strange reason, a guy you admire, is allowed to fight what are universally referred to as bums of the month! Is THAT out of context, or should I not point out your inconsistencies?

Your crusade against me, is due to the fact that I proved you wrong, in previous messages, but you can add to that hatred (which I mentioned previously also) now, with me proving how biased, and hypocritical you are, and yet another example is how you ignore the fact that he was robbed in the Spinks rematch. Guarantee that if it was Louis that was robbed, you would not fail to mention it. Fact is the robbery was against Louis, v Walcott....but let us not mention that hey, we would not want to upset the admin, would we!

The records show that those guys I listed WHERE world champions. I never mentioned Norton was a champ. I listed 9, but that was because I counted Weaver twice, and although he fought him twice, it does not count......or maybe it does, when it is you making a case for someone. Holmes cannot help the fact that boxing politics changed from the time of Louis, and the titles became fractured.

 

You called me jealous in an earlier message, now you are calling Holmes jealous, both assumptions and in my case totally wrong. You still give no (excuse ridden, biased) explanation as to why George would not fight him. Surely he was the perfect opponent.....by your definition, a fat, useless, couldn't beat any decent opponent, has been. You actually want to judge Holmes on his inability to beat current champs, even though he was old and as you love to say, fat, and all the guys that he beat who went on to win a title don't count, nor the ones who had recently lost their title?

The losses were all when he was past his best....by a long way, and someone who was not as biased as you, could argue that he was only beaten when he was past it, and even then, avenged that loss, to an unbeaten reigning champ no less. I really dislike you, you never admit when you get something wrong, never apologize when you call someone, something that they are not, you are full of hatred and bitterness, you are a hypocrite, and you are biased beyond belief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

--- George didn't fight Lar because he was in training pants when George ruled and Senior diapers when George came back.

 

Louis had two controversies, Buddy Baer and Walcott. Knocked em cold in the rematch, end of controversy. Ali and Lar lots of controversies never attended to.

 

Lar turned down WBA challenges and was instrumental in splitting them further with the IBF. You cry us a river, then moan about the flood...whatever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: 3rd best Heavyweight of the 80's?

 

Again with the hypocrisy! I cry do I? You don't do you not? Just because someone wins a rematch, it does not take away the controversy! Did Lewis winning the Holyfield rematch end the controversy of the first bout?

Controversial decisions in boxing history are there forever. Walcott should have a win over Louis and that would alter Joe's record of successful consecutive defenses, making it 23 and not 25, but according to you, it was an "OFFICIAL" win, so it does not matter, does it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...