Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Prime vs prime.Who wins?
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Witherspoon by 9th round kayo.
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Spoon by KO 8
-
AntonioMartin
- Middleweight
- Posts: 1690
- Joined: 22 Feb 2014, 13:19
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Well Patterson is a Hall of Famer and Spoon is not-i actually have begun to wonder whether as a two time champ he should be in,
That, of course, means nothing. Kirkland Laing beat a near prime Roberto Duran and Buster Douglas did the trick to a near prime Mike Tyson, both losers in those cases are in the Hall of Fame and the winners are not. Just like Ernesto Marcel and Vilomar Fernandez beat a prime Alexis Arguello.
I like Floyd here but if Witherspoon lands the right hand that almost dropped Larry Holmes, as everyone here has said, it's good night Senor Patterson.
That, of course, means nothing. Kirkland Laing beat a near prime Roberto Duran and Buster Douglas did the trick to a near prime Mike Tyson, both losers in those cases are in the Hall of Fame and the winners are not. Just like Ernesto Marcel and Vilomar Fernandez beat a prime Alexis Arguello.
I like Floyd here but if Witherspoon lands the right hand that almost dropped Larry Holmes, as everyone here has said, it's good night Senor Patterson.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Patterson is a legitimate Hall of Famer; there should not be much question about that.
Witherspoon always gets a lot of love on Boxrec, but Patterson was better. More often than not Patterson wins this.
Witherspoon always gets a lot of love on Boxrec, but Patterson was better. More often than not Patterson wins this.
-
margaret thatcher
- Featherweight
- Posts: 39242
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
No chance should Spoon be in, he is a bit overrated here too, though still very good fighterAntonioMartin wrote: ↑07 Aug 2020, 08:49 Well Patterson is a Hall of Famer and Spoon is not-i actually have begun to wonder whether as a two time champ he should be in,
That, of course, means nothing. Kirkland Laing beat a near prime Roberto Duran and Buster Douglas did the trick to a near prime Mike Tyson, both losers in those cases are in the Hall of Fame and the winners are not. Just like Ernesto Marcel and Vilomar Fernandez beat a prime Alexis Arguello.
I like Floyd here but if Witherspoon lands the right hand that almost dropped Larry Holmes, as everyone here has said, it's good night Senor Patterson.
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Witherspoon had a not worse right hand, than Johansson has possessed. Patterson wouldn't take the best shot of Spoon. And Floyd wasn't that slick to avoid it. He was fast and explosive, but still he had to get to Spoon without getting caught. Witherspoon was bigger, he had the jab, he had the Norton-esque unorthodox stance and defense, he was hard-hitting. Patterson is a HOFer and so what? How much would this help? What real tools did he have? And what's more important, how he would deal with Spoon's best features.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
The Hall of Fame comment was just answering another poster who questioned it.
You hear a lot about the big Witherspoon right hand, few have actually seen it. In big fight after big fight, he couldn't stop his opponent. Frank Bruno is about it, and he had a glass jaw and it took 11 rounds for him to do it. No, it was not as hard as Johannson's.
What tools did Patterson have? Well he had a really good left hook. Better than Witherspoon's right. His own right was was pretty good as well. He also had very fast hands speed; much faster than Witherspoon. He had plenty of heart.
Witherspoon could be very lazy at times; he often came in out of shape.
Witherspoon would be a live underdog here, but Patterson would beat him the majority of the time.
You hear a lot about the big Witherspoon right hand, few have actually seen it. In big fight after big fight, he couldn't stop his opponent. Frank Bruno is about it, and he had a glass jaw and it took 11 rounds for him to do it. No, it was not as hard as Johannson's.
What tools did Patterson have? Well he had a really good left hook. Better than Witherspoon's right. His own right was was pretty good as well. He also had very fast hands speed; much faster than Witherspoon. He had plenty of heart.
Witherspoon could be very lazy at times; he often came in out of shape.
Witherspoon would be a live underdog here, but Patterson would beat him the majority of the time.
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Patterson's chin was worse than Bruno's one. The heart wouldn't help much, if he nailed by Spoon. Yeah, Spoon was inconsistent, but here it's a talk about prime vs prime, as it's proposed in the thread opening comment, so we are supposed to look at the best version of Witherspoon. Of course, Patterson could have his moments and he would have a quite some amount of them, but Spoon could KO him at any point with a bigger opportunity than vice versa.Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑07 Aug 2020, 13:09 The Hall of Fame comment was just answering another poster who questioned it.
You hear a lot about the big Witherspoon right hand, few have actually seen it. In big fight after big fight, he couldn't stop his opponent. Frank Bruno is about it, and he had a glass jaw and it took 11 rounds for him to do it. No, it was not as hard as Johannson's.
What tools did Patterson have? Well he had a really good left hook. Better than Witherspoon's right. His own right was was pretty good as well. He also had very fast hands speed; much faster than Witherspoon. He had plenty of heart.
Witherspoon could be very lazy at times; he often came in out of shape.
Witherspoon would be a live underdog here, but Patterson would beat him the majority of the time.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 15678
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
I will go with Tim Witherspoon here even though he didn't had a better career than a near great Floyd Patterson.
Patterson never exceeded over 200lbs I believe. He would be too small for a guy that at his best was 6'3" and about 235lbs?
Patterson never exceeded over 200lbs I believe. He would be too small for a guy that at his best was 6'3" and about 235lbs?
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
How about we make a list of all the fights that we could come up with with a great fighter under 200 vs an opponent over 220?
Well we did that a couple of years ago. What was it, 28-2 for the smaller guy?
Witherspoon wasn't exactly a rock solid 235 when he weighed that much.
Where is the evidence that Witherspoon was such a hard puncher?
Look at his big fights:
Snipes
Page
Holmes
Thomas
Tubbs
Smith 2x
Williams
Stopped Bruno
9 big fights in his career and only stoppage.
Not saying he couldn't punch at all, but he was not some brutal puncher by any means. Patterson was a bigger puncher.
I will take the Patterson in his prime vs Witherspoon in his prime.
Well we did that a couple of years ago. What was it, 28-2 for the smaller guy?
Witherspoon wasn't exactly a rock solid 235 when he weighed that much.
Where is the evidence that Witherspoon was such a hard puncher?
Look at his big fights:
Snipes
Page
Holmes
Thomas
Tubbs
Smith 2x
Williams
Stopped Bruno
9 big fights in his career and only stoppage.
Not saying he couldn't punch at all, but he was not some brutal puncher by any means. Patterson was a bigger puncher.
I will take the Patterson in his prime vs Witherspoon in his prime.
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
I assume, in this particular case there's a point not about Witherspoon's power itself, but about it being enough to KO particularly Patterson. Spoon wasn't a brutal puncher like Tyson or Foreman, or Shavers, or Frazier, or Tua, or Morrison, or Ruddock, and the list can go on. Yet Spoon was a decent puncher, whose punch would be enough to KO Patterson, who had chin issues.Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑07 Aug 2020, 19:38 Not saying he couldn't punch at all, but he was not some brutal puncher by any means. Patterson was a bigger puncher.
I will take the Patterson in his prime vs Witherspoon in his prime.
While Patterson himself had a better punch, that's true, but obviously it's not related to his abilities of taking shots. Witherspoon could take a punch better also.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Witherspoon was a decent puncher, that I agree with. Quarry was a decent puncher. So was Jimmy Ellis. So was Archie Moore. So was Bonavena. None of them stopped him. Not to say that it would be impossible that Witherspoon would stop Patterson; it just isn't probable. Witherspoon might hurt Patterson, he might deck him. going by their track records, he probably would not stop him.
Witherspoon did have a better chin that Patterson (though Witherspoon did not have rock solid chin). Patterson was the harder puncher. that makes it seem even if that were the only factors.
However power and chin aren't the factors. Patterson was usually a busier fighter. He had faster hands. He would be landing more punches. The odds are with Patterson in this one.
Witherspoon did have a better chin that Patterson (though Witherspoon did not have rock solid chin). Patterson was the harder puncher. that makes it seem even if that were the only factors.
However power and chin aren't the factors. Patterson was usually a busier fighter. He had faster hands. He would be landing more punches. The odds are with Patterson in this one.
-
Cojimar 1946
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 1692
- Joined: 01 Mar 2015, 05:00
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
There was a Patterson vs Bowe thread recently in which Bowe was heavily favored to beat Patterson H2H.
That being the case I would expect Witherspoon to be favored given he possesses most of the same advantages that Bowe does.
That being the case I would expect Witherspoon to be favored given he possesses most of the same advantages that Bowe does.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Bowe is a totally different story than Witherspoon.
-
Cojimar 1946
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 1692
- Joined: 01 Mar 2015, 05:00
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Obviously there are stylistic differences but people seemed to feel that as soon as Bowe landed something he would easily knock Patterson out. I think Witherspoon easily punches as hard as Bowe shot for shot.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 15678
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 18:38 Obviously there are stylistic differences but people seemed to feel that as soon as Bowe landed something he would easily knock Patterson out. I think Witherspoon easily punches as hard as Bowe shot for shot.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
No way.Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 18:38 Obviously there are stylistic differences but people seemed to feel that as soon as Bowe landed something he would easily knock Patterson out. I think Witherspoon easily punches as hard as Bowe shot for shot.
-
Cojimar 1946
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 1692
- Joined: 01 Mar 2015, 05:00
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
I think he probably did based on who he knocked out and how his opponents reacted to his shots. I seem to recall him hurting Mercer multiple times when past his best.
Witherspoon seemed to so simply go through the motions against inferior opposition, showing up out of shape and simply doing enough to win but when motivated and in shape he was pretty formidable.
Witherspoon seemed to so simply go through the motions against inferior opposition, showing up out of shape and simply doing enough to win but when motivated and in shape he was pretty formidable.
-
Onetimeonly
- Super Featherweight
- Posts: 11584
- Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 06:28
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 11:12 There was a Patterson vs Bowe thread recently in which Bowe was heavily favored to beat Patterson H2H.
That being the case I would expect Witherspoon to be favored given he possesses most of the same advantages that Bowe does.
Near prime Duran vs Laing?
One thing I find puzzling are the later Rd spoon calls. If Floyd is around in the 9th or 10th Rd he isn't going anywhere. I'm one that likes Witherspoon on a lot of mythical bouts, I think Patterson outboxes him here more often than not.
-
Onetimeonly
- Super Featherweight
- Posts: 11584
- Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 06:28
Re: Heavyweights : Tim Witherspoon vs . Floyd Patterson
He had a better defense than bowe and an equal chin. Bowe was better in every offensive category and much more consistent.Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 22:58No way.Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑10 Aug 2020, 18:38 Obviously there are stylistic differences but people seemed to feel that as soon as Bowe landed something he would easily knock Patterson out. I think Witherspoon easily punches as hard as Bowe shot for shot.