Most avoided fighter of the last 25 years.

[Bodyshot3]

Edwin Valero springs to mind.

He had to take his show on the road to all corners of the globe because his scans never fully-satisfied all the doctors and probably because his loco lifestyle in Venezuela was already 'complicated'.....and when he started bombing people out the queue to face him got a whole lot shorter.

Looking back at his record it seems fair to say that he did not have a defining fight and that he was often put in with decent, unbeaten hometown prospects who the promoter felt might have a chance of upsetting the form book and Edwin came relatively cheap.

All those fights he won in Japan against local contenders and a few overseas fighters as well strike me as a career spent on the backfoot where Edwin needed the knockout to win.

Big Ray Mercer - post the highly disputed war with Lewis when Lennox looked like he'd been hit by a freight train - also worth a mention?

[palooka]

Edwin Valero springs to mind.

He had to take his show on the road to all corners of the globe because his scans never fully-satisfied all the doctors and probably because his loco lifestyle in Venezuela was already 'complicated'.....and when he started bombing people out the queue to face him got a whole lot shorter.

Looking back at his record it seems fair to say that he did not have a defining fight and that he was often put in with decent, unbeaten hometown prospects who the promoter felt might have a chance of upsetting the form book and Edwin came relatively cheap.

All those fights he won in Japan against local contenders and a few overseas fighters as well strike me as a career spent on the backfoot where Edwin needed the knockout to win.

Big Ray Mercer - post the highly disputed war with Lewis when Lennox looked like he'd been hit by a freight train - als
o worth a mention?

Both good shouts and wasn't Valero promoted by a powerful Japanese promoter? He'd made some noise as an amateur, though he was a foreigner in Japan he was the home fighter.

[ClivePatrickLyons]

Listen and learn keithmoonhangover Witherspoon had a contract at the time with THE DON that said the only way his contract with THE DON
would become non existent or in other word's over [their promoter/fighter relationship] was the moment Witherspoon lost his WBA title either
in the ring or he could have religuished the WBA title and walked with no MONEY OR TAKE THE FIGHT WITH SMITH AND TAKE THE DIVE AND
GET AWAY FROM MR KING WITH SOMETHING IN THE BANK so we know what Tim did don't we 18 month's earlier Tim punched the soul case out
of Smith losing only 1 round on all judge's score card's this was over 12 round's and then Tim cannot last 1 round with a fighter he used has his
bunny[punching bag] 18 mth's previous and yeah he might have made 1 million dollar's plus for a Tyson unification fight just like he signed
for roughly the same amount of money in the Bruno fight at WEMBLEY..........fu.. Aussie Joe Bugner put 700k in his pocket at the same venue
Against Bruno and he had no WBA WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT TITLE come too think of it he had NO DON EITHER

[keithmoonhangover]

Listen and learn keithmoonhangover Witherspoon had a contract at the time with THE DON that said the only way his contract with THE DON
would become non existent or in other word's over [their promoter/fighter relationship] was the moment Witherspoon lost his WBA title either
in the ring or he could have religuished the WBA title and walked with no MONEY OR TAKE THE FIGHT WITH SMITH AND TAKE THE DIVE AND
GET AWAY FROM MR KING WITH SOMETHING IN THE BANK so we know what Tim did don't we 18 month's earlier Tim punched the soul case out
of Smith losing only 1 round on all judge's score card's this was over 12 round's and then Tim cannot last 1 round with a fighter he used has his
bunny[punching bag] 18 mth's previous and yeah he might have made 1 million dollar's plus for a Tyson unification fight just like he signed
for roughly the same amount of money in the Bruno fight at WEMBLEY..........fu.. Aussie Joe Bugner put 700k in his pocket at the same venue
Against Bruno and he had no WBA WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT TITLE come too think of it he had NO DON EITHER

I don't think you read my post or understand the legalities of contracts. We disagree massively, so I'll bid you goodbye on this topic.

[Bricks]

No one mentioned JAMES TONEY

Benn,eubank,the klitchkos ,hopkins....they all avoided him

[Tuan_Jim]

Your question is so naive I would have to waste valuable minutes of my life writing paragraph after paragraph for you, a grown man who when confronted with information he doesn't like responds with 'lols' and emoticons.

Why don't you read some of the fine literature on that period of heavyweight boxing, in particular the HBO unification tournament, to see how ludicrous the idea of a man knocking out Mike Tyson and slipping free of Don King's tentacles is?

Though King was very powerful didn't Douglas knock out Tyson and get big money v Holyfield?

(Who promoted the Tyson v Spinks bout?)

Yes, Douglas managed to get out of the Tyson rematch and I'm sure their was a clause in the contract for one.

King did have a tight grip, but like Douglas, Witherspoon could have got away from King if he'd shocked the world and beat Tyson.

Douglas was legally free of Don King. There was no rematch clause.

Spoon meanwhile had to get blown out by Bonecrusher and lose his precious belt to escape his slavery. Boxing brilliantly versus Larry Holmes made his life worse. Boxing brilliantly versus Frank Bruno made his life worse. King and Suliman made Douglas' life a nightmare for beating Tyson. He would have been stripped of the WBC and WBA belts had their not been worldwide media shaming of King and his bandits - and they had no claim over Douglas. The notion of Spoon, up to his eyeballs in Don and Carl contracts, KOing Tyson and "buying out his contract" is absurd.

[keithmoonhangover]

Spoon meanwhile had to get blown out by Bonecrusher and lose his precious belt to escape his slavery. Boxing brilliantly versus Larry Holmes made his life worse. Boxing brilliantly versus Frank Bruno made his life worse. King and Suliman made Douglas' life a nightmare for beating Tyson. He would have been stripped of the WBC and WBA belts had their not been worldwide media shaming of King and his bandits - and they had no claim over Douglas. The notion of Spoon, up to his eyeballs in Don and Carl contracts, KOing Tyson and "buying out his contract" is absurd.

Stop talking bollocks man.

Was it in Spoons contract that he would somehow miraculously be released from his contract if he lost to Smith? Because he never fought another fight for Smith afterwards. I didn't notice Kind suing him. Quite the contrary, Witherspoon sued King and won a settlement. I can't imagine King paying that unless he was going to lose. Yes, that was later, but what King did to Smith happened before the Smith rematch. If Witherspoon had beaten Tyson, he could have hired the best legal team money could buy. They would find a way out of his contract. If you can't see how that would work, you're not as smart as you think you are.

[Tuan_Jim]

This is fan fiction, Keith. You just don't understand the basics of what you're talking about, and haven't bothered to research anything.

[keithmoonhangover]

This is fan fiction, Keith. You just don't understand the basics of what you're talking about, and haven't bothered to research anything.

I researched it all mate, I still have all the magazines. I was there when this happened. You make it sound like no one ever got out of a contract. I happens all the time, especially in boxing.

Witherspoon was out of his contract after the Smith fight. If you're so wise, why did that happen? If you've researched all of this so much, then you should be able to tell me. Thanks in advance.

[Tuan_Jim]

Because he was knocked out in 1 round, Keith. That's why he was released from his contract.

What's your next question? What's 1 + 1?

[orbtastic]

In his book he says he took the dive because it meant he'd be released from his contract.

[keithmoonhangover]

Because he was knocked out in 1 round, Keith. That's why he was released from his contract.

What's your next question? What's 1 + 1?

My next question is...... How much do manners cost?

[palooka]

Because he was knocked out in 1 round, Keith. That's why he was released from his contract.

What's your next question? What's 1 + 1?

My next question is...... How much do manners costs?

You're asking an American?

[palooka]

In his book he says he took the dive because it meant he'd be released from his contract.

Yeah, but what does Meldrick Taylor say about iit?

[keithmoonhangover]

In his book he says he took the dive because it meant he'd be released from his contract.

Did he say why? Did King just let him walk?

[keithmoonhangover]

Douglas was legally free of Don King.

Well, Mr 1+1, I knew you were full of shit. I just wanted to get the facts to back it up. Here is the link to Douglas reaching an out-of-court settlement with King for breach of contract.

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-07-16/ ... 1_don-king

Buster paid King in the region of $7,000,000 in order to fight Holyfield.

Turns out your facts are about as good as your manners.

Oh, and apology accepted.

[ClivePatrickLyons]

Spoon meanwhile had to get blown out by Bonecrusher and lose his precious belt to escape his slavery. Boxing brilliantly versus Larry Holmes made his life worse. Boxing brilliantly versus Frank Bruno made his life worse. King and Suliman made Douglas' life a nightmare for beating Tyson. He would have been stripped of the WBC and WBA belts had their not been worldwide media shaming of King and his bandits - and they had no claim over Douglas. The notion of Spoon, up to his eyeballs in Don and Carl contracts, KOing Tyson and "buying out his contract" is absurd.

Stop talking bollocks man.

Was it in Spoons contract that he would somehow miraculously be released from his contract if he lost to Smith? Because he never fought another fight for Smith afterwards. I didn't notice Kind suing him. Quite the contrary, Witherspoon sued King and won a settlement. I can't imagine King paying that unless he was going to lose. Yes, that was later, but what King did to Smith happened before the Smith rematch. If Witherspoon had beaten Tyson, he could have hired the best legal team money could buy. They would find a way out of his contract. If you can't see how that would work, you're not as smart as you think you are.

I'v just read you STUPID post...........IT'S NOT LISTEN AND LEARN IN YOUR CASE MY FRIEND IT'S MORE LIKE LIVE AND LEARN. D
ADMIT YOUR WRONG AND YOU PUT YOUR FOOT IN IT

[keithmoonhangover]

Spoon meanwhile had to get blown out by Bonecrusher and lose his precious belt to escape his slavery. Boxing brilliantly versus Larry Holmes made his life worse. Boxing brilliantly versus Frank Bruno made his life worse. King and Suliman made Douglas' life a nightmare for beating Tyson. He would have been stripped of the WBC and WBA belts had their not been worldwide media shaming of King and his bandits - and they had no claim over Douglas. The notion of Spoon, up to his eyeballs in Don and Carl contracts, KOing Tyson and "buying out his contract" is absurd.

Stop talking bollocks man.

Was it in Spoons contract that he would somehow miraculously be released from his contract if he lost to Smith? Because he never fought another fight for Smith afterwards. I didn't notice Kind suing him. Quite the contrary, Witherspoon sued King and won a settlement. I can't imagine King paying that unless he was going to lose. Yes, that was later, but what King did to Smith happened before the Smith rematch. If Witherspoon had beaten Tyson, he could have hired the best legal team money could buy. They would find a way out of his contract. If you can't see how that would work, you're not as smart as you think you are.

I'v just read you STUPID post...........IT'S NOT LISTEN AND LEARN IN YOUR CASE MY FRIEND IT'S MORE LIKE LIVE AND LEARN. D
ADMIT YOUR WRONG AND YOU PUT YOUR FOOT IN IT

I''d admit I was wrong if I was, but I'm not. Buster Douglas got free of King when he beat Tyson and so could WItherspoon.

[GPTM1403]

I can see where Keith is coming from. Personally I don't think that beating Smith would have allowed Witherspoon to buy out of Kings clutches. I think he was already intimidated/frustrated by the prospect of facing Tyson (you really would want to be focused for that fight) with Don King as banker. I don't think it's simple.

I think we will never know for sure if Tim threw the fight with Bonecrusher. But the best you can say for him is that he didn't give everything that night. Whatever the circumstances, I think that is inexcusable. He was capable of beating Tyson, and winning the fight with Smith would have put him in that fight. I guess he just didn't have the willpower or belief to overcome the situation he was in. I don't judge him too harshly on that, but I wouldn't say he deserves a pass either.

I wouldn't say it's as simple as he only had to beat Smith. I would say it's a case of him having to beat Smith AND Tyson for his endeavours to have been worthwhile.

But to address the topic at hand, I've always believed that Witherspoon was avoided in his late career, undoubtedly due King freezing him out, but to what extent he was avoided by Bowe, Foreman and Lewis I have no idea.

And as a side note, I don't think that Bonecrusher gets enough credit for Beating Witherspoon that night. He came for the prize and he left the ring a winner.

Seems fair enough summary, only thing I'd add is I'm sure it was more than just rumoured at the time he not so much took a dive but didn't give a flying about the fight because he was so fed up with the whole thing and just didn't try. Sadly give it a few years and the fact he was an exceptional talent will be long forgotten and he'll just be remembered as a fat guy who got screwed by Don King. (Should that be another fat guy?)

[Tuan_Jim]

Nice try Keith, but if you researched that case further you would see that Douglas could only box Holyfield without Don King's involvement. Had Douglas beaten Holyfield he was, unbelievably, obliged to box for Don King again - something to the tune of two or three defences "plus two years" on top. The kernel of his case against King was that he had actively campaigned to have Douglas' win annulled and later his belts stripped.

So, to underline my initial point, Witherspoon could not buy his way out of his contract. Not even Douglas, with a $24,000,000 payday on the horizon, and a promoter who had openly tried to taint his win and steal his title belts, could escape King's tentacles.

A thoroughly demoralised Douglas escaped the same way Witherspoon did. By immolating himself in the ring.

[keithmoonhangover]

Nice try Keith, but if you researched that case further you would see that Douglas could only box Holyfield without Don King's involvement. Had Douglas beaten Holyfield he was, unbelievably, obliged to box for Don King again - something to the tune of two or three defences "plus two years" on top. The kernel of his case against King was that he had actively campaigned to have Douglas' win annulled and later his belts stripped.

So, to underline my initial point, Witherspoon could not buy his way out of his contract. Not even Douglas, with a $24,000,000 payday on the horizon, and a promoter who had openly tried to taint his win and steal his title belts, could escape King's tentacles.

A thoroughly demoralised Douglas escaped the same way Witherspoon did. By immolating himself in the ring.

A couple of posts ago you said Douglas was "legally free of Don King." !!! Make your mind up 1 + 1!!!!

I'll tell you what, admit you were wrong and we can continue this conversation.

[Tuan_Jim]

You asked 'how could Douglas box Holyfield without King?' - I said he was 'legally free of King' - which he was for that one fight, I simply couldn't be bothered writing a fat paragraph about complex court wranglings for the likes of you, for this exact reason - you can't process information and so I get sucked into your endless bog of nonsense and befuddlement. The piece I did write above is heavily abridged - but the facts are (the facts, Keith, the facts) that he had to return to Don King should he win his Kingless Holyfield reprieve.

You say Witherspoon could permanently rid himself of King by beating Tyson, using Douglas as your point of comparison - even though that is obviously wrong and based on your ignorance of the events. Douglas could only free himself of King for one fight, under extraodrindary circumstances (contrived long count, conflict of interest, payment of future earnings etc), and was forced to go back to King afterwards.

It's irrelevent whether you admit your wrong, you are wrong, as anyone who reads the endless print elucidating the outcome of that case can see. The only way Douglas could permantly escape King was by losing, just as Witherspoon did.

[keithmoonhangover]

You asked 'how could Douglas box Holyfield without King?' - I said he was 'legally free of King' - which he was for that one fight, I simply couldn't be bothered writing a fat paragraph about complex court wranglings for the likes of you, for this exact reason - you can't process information and so I get sucked into your endless bog of nonsense and befuddlement. The piece I did write above is heavily abridged - but the facts are (the facts, Keith, the facts) that he had to return to Don King should he win his Kingless Holyfield reprieve.

You say Witherspoon could permanently rid himself of King by beating Tyson, using Douglas as your point of comparison - even though that is obviously wrong and based on your ignorance of the events. Douglas could only free himself of King for one fight, under extraodrindary circumstances (contrived long count, conflict of interest, payment of future earnings etc), and was forced to go back to King afterwards.

It's irrelevent whether you admit your wrong, you are wrong, as anyone who reads the endless print elucidating the outcome of that case can see. The only way Douglas could permantly escape King was by losing, just as Witherspoon did.

So you're not even man enough to admit you're wrong, you'd prefer to try and wriggle out of it. That says a lot about you as a person. Stubborn, pretentious and lacking in manners. I'll just leave you to it mate.

[Ambling Alp II]

Usually hard to say if a guy is avoided or not.
I never could understand why Tony Tucker went so long without fighting one of the top guys after he fought Tyson. The same for Larry Donald after he fought Bowe. It was the first loss for both and they put in credible performances.

[Tuan_Jim]

You asked 'how could Douglas box Holyfield without King?' - I said he was 'legally free of King' - which he was for that one fight, I simply couldn't be bothered writing a fat paragraph about complex court wranglings for the likes of you, for this exact reason - you can't process information and so I get sucked into your endless bog of nonsense and befuddlement. The piece I did write above is heavily abridged - but the facts are (the facts, Keith, the facts) that he had to return to Don King should he win his Kingless Holyfield reprieve.

You say Witherspoon could permanently rid himself of King by beating Tyson, using Douglas as your point of comparison - even though that is obviously wrong and based on your ignorance of the events. Douglas could only free himself of King for one fight, under extraodrindary circumstances (contrived long count, conflict of interest, payment of future earnings etc), and was forced to go back to King afterwards.

It's irrelevent whether you admit your wrong, you are wrong, as anyone who reads the endless print elucidating the outcome of that case can see. The only way Douglas could permantly escape King was by losing, just as Witherspoon did.

So you're not even man enough to admit you're wrong, you'd prefer to try and wriggle out of it. That says a lot about you as a person. Stubborn, pretentious and lacking in manners. I'll just leave you to it mate.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You proposed a fantastical idea that Witherspoon could beat Tyson and buy his way out of his contract. You've used half the Buster Douglas case to prove your point because if you included the complete case you would have to concede Douglas had to go back to Don King and admit you were wrong.

It's irrelevant whether you, a man with a child's brain, can bear to admit he is completely wrong (yet again). The facts are there for posterity:

"The settlement frees Douglas to defend his title against Evander Holyfield in September."

"As part of the agreement, King will promote a rematch between Douglas and Tyson should Douglas defeat Holyfield."

King's lawyer, Bob Hirth, said that after that, ''Don's promotional rights for the length of the contract are reaffirmed. His promotional contract covers the time that Douglas is champion, plus two years.''

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/18/sport ... ement.html