Page 7 of 7
Re: Mike tyson vs riddick bowe 1991?
Posted: 31 Aug 2026, 21:32
by Cojimar 1946
SteveO wrote: ↑Yesterday, 14:25
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑28 Aug 2026, 19:07
Most people didn't regard Briggs as champ though. His claim was ignored by the general public.
Doesn't matter. Like it or not Briggs was the lineal champion.
Which the majority of boxing fans found totally irrelevant myself included. Holyfield was considered the champ and the guy to beat.
Briggs wasn't even a top 10 heavyweight which makes it even sillier
Re: Mike tyson vs riddick bowe 1991?
Posted: 31 Aug 2026, 22:23
by gilgamesh
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑Yesterday, 21:32
SteveO wrote: ↑Yesterday, 14:25
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑28 Aug 2026, 19:07
Most people didn't regard Briggs as champ though. His claim was ignored by the general public.
Doesn't matter. Like it or not Briggs was the lineal champion.
Which the majority of boxing fans found totally irrelevant myself included. Holyfield was considered the champ and the guy to beat.
Briggs wasn't even a top 10 heavyweight which makes it even sillier
So what is the point of this whole side tangent we've gotten off into again?
Re: Mike tyson vs riddick bowe 1991?
Posted: 01 Sep 2026, 01:02
by Cojimar 1946
gilgamesh wrote: ↑Yesterday, 22:23
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑Yesterday, 21:32
SteveO wrote: ↑Yesterday, 14:25
Doesn't matter. Like it or not Briggs was the lineal champion.
Which the majority of boxing fans found totally irrelevant myself included. Holyfield was considered the champ and the guy to beat.
Briggs wasn't even a top 10 heavyweight which makes it even sillier
So what is the point of this whole side tangent we've gotten off into again?
That lineage isn't required to be considered the real champ by the majority of boxing fans.
You don't get to dismiss someone like Thomas because you don't consider them lineal.
Re: Mike tyson vs riddick bowe 1991?
Posted: 01 Sep 2026, 01:15
by gilgamesh
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑Today, 01:02
gilgamesh wrote: ↑Yesterday, 22:23
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑Yesterday, 21:32
Which the majority of boxing fans found totally irrelevant myself included. Holyfield was considered the champ and the guy to beat.
Briggs wasn't even a top 10 heavyweight which makes it even sillier
So what is the point of this whole side tangent we've gotten off into again?
That lineage isn't required to be considered the real champ by the majority of boxing fans.
You don't get to dismiss someone like Thomas because you don't consider them lineal.
I don't dismiss him. I consider him a Heavyweight Titlist and a good, but not great fighter.
There's a World of difference between "Dismissing" Pinklon Thomas and considering him an equal to Larry Holmes.