Glen McCrorys take on Chisora-Klitchko

[oliverfennell]

Williams lost to Francis, Sprott and Sam before the Tyson or Vitali fights. Clearly he was not a top level fighter and was out of his league against Vitali. He was good enough to beat a Tyson that Kevin mcBride beat. He went on to beat Harrison after the Tyson and Klitschko fights. Harrison is better than Francis, Sprott or Sam so I don't think Williams was "never the same". He just was never that good.

While the Tyson that Williams beat was far from his best, he regressed alarmingly even from that point. I'd say the Tyson that McBride beat wasn't even 20% of the one that Williams beat! If McBride had fought Tyson the night that Williams did, Tyson would have won KO 1, absolutely no doubt in my mind.

[balance]

Williams lost to Francis, Sprott and Sam before the Tyson or Vitali fights. Clearly he was not a top level fighter and was out of his league against Vitali. He was good enough to beat a Tyson that Kevin mcBride beat. He went on to beat Harrison after the Tyson and Klitschko fights. Harrison is better than Francis, Sprott or Sam so I don't think Williams was "never the same". He just was never that good.

While the Tyson that Williams beat was far from his best, he regressed alarmingly even from that point. I'd say the Tyson that McBride beat wasn't even 20% of the one that Williams beat! If McBride had fought Tyson the night that Williams did, Tyson would have won KO 1, absolutely no doubt in my mind.

I disagree. Williams was just poor enough to make even that version of Tyson look good for two rounds. Tyson showed good work in the first two rounds of the McBride fight too, which was his next fight after the Williams fight. Essentially, Tyson had no stamina at that stage of his career and was not anywhere near world class.

[oliverfennell]

Williams lost to Francis, Sprott and Sam before the Tyson or Vitali fights. Clearly he was not a top level fighter and was out of his league against Vitali. He was good enough to beat a Tyson that Kevin mcBride beat. He went on to beat Harrison after the Tyson and Klitschko fights. Harrison is better than Francis, Sprott or Sam so I don't think Williams was "never the same". He just was never that good.

While the Tyson that Williams beat was far from his best, he regressed alarmingly even from that point. I'd say the Tyson that McBride beat wasn't even 20% of the one that Williams beat! If McBride had fought Tyson the night that Williams did, Tyson would have won KO 1, absolutely no doubt in my mind.

I disagree. Williams was just poor enough to make even that version of Tyson look good for two rounds. Tyson showed good work in the first two rounds of the McBride fight too, which was his next fight after the Williams fight. Essentially, Tyson had no stamina at that stage of his career and was not anywhere near world class.

I didn't see those two good rounds vs McBride.

I'm not saying Williams was world class or capable of beating a better Tyson, rather that McBride is/was so poor that there was no way he could have stood up to a round of even the 2004 Tyson's attack. You could be right in saying Williams flattered Tyson's potency that night, but even if so, there's no way McBride could have lived with even that Tyson.

[balance]

While the Tyson that Williams beat was far from his best, he regressed alarmingly even from that point. I'd say the Tyson that McBride beat wasn't even 20% of the one that Williams beat! If McBride had fought Tyson the night that Williams did, Tyson would have won KO 1, absolutely no doubt in my mind.

I disagree. Williams was just poor enough to make even that version of Tyson look good for two rounds. Tyson showed good work in the first two rounds of the McBride fight too, which was his next fight after the Williams fight. Essentially, Tyson had no stamina at that stage of his career and was not anywhere near world class.

I didn't see those two good rounds vs McBride.

I'm not saying Williams was world class or capable of beating a better Tyson, rather that McBride is/was so poor that there was no way he could have stood up to a round of even the 2004 Tyson's attack. You could be right in saying Williams flattered Tyson's potency that night, but even if so, there's no way McBride could have lived with even that Tyson.

The fight with Williams happened 11 months before the McBride fight. Tyson was spent by the third round of the Williams fight. All McBride would have had to do was survive 6 minutes. We can agree to disagree on this one.

[oliverfennell]

I disagree. Williams was just poor enough to make even that version of Tyson look good for two rounds. Tyson showed good work in the first two rounds of the McBride fight too, which was his next fight after the Williams fight. Essentially, Tyson had no stamina at that stage of his career and was not anywhere near world class.

I didn't see those two good rounds vs McBride.

I'm not saying Williams was world class or capable of beating a better Tyson, rather that McBride is/was so poor that there was no way he could have stood up to a round of even the 2004 Tyson's attack. You could be right in saying Williams flattered Tyson's potency that night, but even if so, there's no way McBride could have lived with even that Tyson.

The fight with Williams happened 11 months before the McBride fight. Tyson was spent by the third round of the Williams fight. All McBride would have had to do was survive 6 minutes. We can agree to disagree on this one.

Yes we wiill, and obviously it's a completely moot/speculative point.

Again, it's not so much that I'm rating Williams, more that I don't rate McBride. The very fact he could "survive 6 minutes" against ANY version of Tyson is the point and, for me, the evidence of dramatic decline even in 11 months. They absolutely could not have found a more hand-picked opponent for Tyson at that stage, and he still couldn't win. Hell, even Julius Francis probably could have gotten revenge that night.