What fights couldn't you have been more wrong about ?

[Controversial]

Im just telling you what farrell said

He had some interesting stories

I don't believe that for a second, it makes no sense, why not wait to see the outcome of the fight first as McCall might have lost anyway and they would've saved themselves a load of money paying him off. If McCall won they could've paid him to throw the Tyson fight, surely that's the time you'd do it, not the fight before.. That's if we believe that's what was going on. What proof has he given for this?

Farrell said because mccall was so nuts they feared he wouldnt comply and could theoretically ko tyson at this point in their careers. So they paid him to drop a decision to bruno and luckily he complied

Farrell had a wild idea to have mitch green meet with tyson in prison and sucker punch him - and king was interested until green balked at it

Again this is from his book. Its a good read. Is some of it bs? Probably

He claimed holyfield and holmes made a side agreement to let holmes win some rounds and not get hurt (he didnt name them i surmised it from his telling)

I’d take it all with a pinch of salt, if you think some is BS how can you tell what is and what isn’t. He wouldn’t be the first author to make wild claims to sell a book. Surely if he’s admitting to match fixing why is he not being arrested?

[Riddick Bowie]

They paid mccall to drop the fight to bruno. Tysons camp deemed mccall too dangerous

I read this in charles farrells book

Tyson paid McCall step aside money? That doesn't make sense as McCall was champ and Bruno was his mandatory. Tyson had only had one fight since leaving prison (McNeeley). Bruno beat McCall and fought Tyson 6 months later. There was no rematch clause, the winner had to fight Tyson.

I doubt McCall would've wanted to fight Tyson even if it were possible as Bruno was the easier pick of the two (and his mandatory) and the winner would have to fight Tyson anyway. If anything it would make more sense for McCall to pay Tyson step aside money so McCall could defend against Bruno, but that wasn't an option as Tyson wasn't in line for a title shot at that time.

Talking of Bruno and Tyson although I didn't think Bruno would win I remember thinking he had a much better chance in the rematch. He looked a lot stronger and had a few more fights under his belt and the confidence of being champ. Tyson had lost, been in prison for a few years and was ring rusty. So I thought Bruno would give him a tougher fight but as we saw Bruno looked petrified and fell apart quicker than a cheap suit.

Bruno was a voluntary defence for McCall; the WBC installed Tyson as their no 1 contender before he even had a comeback fight (!)

The other poster's claim that McCall was paid to lose because the Tyson camp feared him is laughable. The first fight Tyson saw out of prison was McCall, his ex sparring partner, struggling to an MD over 45 yr old Holmes who he had blitzed years earlier. Not exactly a fight that would have Tyson quaking in his low cut black boxing boots.

[Controversial]

Bruno was a voluntary defence for McCall; the WBC installed Tyson as their no 1 contender before he even had a comeback fight (!)

The other poster's claim that McCall was paid to lose because the Tyson camp feared him is laughable. The first fight Tyson saw out of prison was McCall, his ex sparring partner, struggling to an MD over 45 yr old Holmes who he had blitzed years earlier. Not exactly a fight that would have Tyson quaking in his low cut black boxing boots.

I may be wrong then but thought Bruno was mandatory, either way I can’t see them paying McCall to lose.

[Riddick Bowie]

Bruno was a voluntary defence for McCall; the WBC installed Tyson as their no 1 contender before he even had a comeback fight (!)

The other poster's claim that McCall was paid to lose because the Tyson camp feared him is laughable. The first fight Tyson saw out of prison was McCall, his ex sparring partner, struggling to an MD over 45 yr old Holmes who he had blitzed years earlier. Not exactly a fight that would have Tyson quaking in his low cut black boxing boots.

I may be wrong then but thought Bruno was mandatory, either way I can’t see them paying McCall to lose.

Me neither, it's ridiculous.

[Controversial]

McCall was pretty inconsistent, he had a decent dig and good chin but not much else to his game, hence dropping decisions throughout his career or grinding out wins. Even Akinwande was ahead on the cards until McCall stopped him with seconds to go.

[gilgamesh]

McCall was pretty inconsistent, he had a decent dig and good chin but not much else to his game, hence dropping decisions throughout his career or grinding out wins. Even Akinwande was ahead on the cards until McCall stopped him with seconds to go.

Yep. Good chin and he could Crack pretty well especially with his right, but he was fairly sloppy and couldn't box especially well

[hhaehre]

McCall was pretty inconsistent, he had a decent dig and good chin but not much else to his game, hence dropping decisions throughout his career or grinding out wins. Even Akinwande was ahead on the cards until McCall stopped him with seconds to go.

Yep. Good chin and he could Crack pretty well especially with his right, but he was fairly sloppy and couldn't box especially well

Also had a bit of the sparring partner syndrome.