BoxRec

The nature of any discussion board is it starts out with a topic and then may lead to something else. The people who wanted to speculate on the health of Thomas did so and their was no more information forthcoming so things switched gears a bit. If someone has something new on Thomas I would be interested to hear it and would gladly step out of the way and let the topic go on. If not than I think it's cool for people to take it a in different direction.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:look at who holmes beat in the 1980s

green carl williams
tim witherspoon
green marvis frasier
trevor berbick
david bey
gerry cooney
renaldo snipes
green bonecrusher smith

look at who tyson beat in the 1980s

tony tubbs
pinklon thomas
carl williams
old larry holmes
frank bruno
michael spinx
tony tucker
trevor berbick
bonecrusher smith
marvis frasier
quick tillis

Of course, if we are trying to be objective, neither of these stack up very good when comparing them to the list of opponents for most of the top HWs from the early-mid 70s. Definitely quantity over quality in these two resumes. Of course, you can’t fault them for the lack of defining opponents.

Realistically, Pinklon Thomas was pretty much shot by the time Tyson got to him. As I’ve noted in several other threads, prior to the Tyson fight, Pinky looked dreadful against Berbick and never beat another world class HW during the remainder of his career. Spinks was also headed to the valley, but I don’t think that matters much as Tyson would have been too much for any version of Spinks.

thomas retty much shot? a classic tyson hater comment. i dont buy it.


thomas was still a top 10 ranked contender and he looked good vs tyson. he used his jab very well in the early rounds and showed world class boxing skills. no way he was close to shot.

the reason thomas did so badly vs berbick was because berbick fought a terrific fight and berbick matches up well vs thomas.

i dont believe after thomas dominated in 84-85, suddenly he aged dramatically overnight and was shot when he faced tyson 2 years later. tyson detractors only want people to believe this, even though they dont believe it themselves.



btw, a peak thomas would not have lasted any longer or done any better. tyson beat the shit out of thomas, easy win. this was a peak tyson...... one of the greatest heavyweights of all time. pinklon has no answer for tyson, even at his peak.




pinklon became shot AFTER he fought tyson

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i dont believe after thomas dominated in 84-85, suddenly he aged dramatically overnight and was shot when he faced tyson 2 years later. tyson detractors only want people to believe this, even though they dont believe it themselves.

Ahem. This sounds exactly like your description of Tyson’s career. He dominated in 87-88 and then suddenly aged overnight before he fought Douglas. Or was it a prime Tyson that got his ass handed to him by Douglas?

And what makes me a Tyson hater? I was a HUGE Tyson fan before you were out of diapers – maybe before you were born. Just because someone can objectively assess a boxer’s career he’s a hater? I and many others are just a bit more objective in our evaluations of fighters.

You certainly seem to have an almost unnatural passion for Tyson. He was a great fighter. But like all fighters, he was certainly far from perfect. Or maybe you think he WAS perfect?

BTW I was also a HUGE Pinky fan. But I’d hardly say he dominated 84-85. He was one of the top HWs during that time, but he was hardly the dominant HW. Perhaps there’s just a wee bit of embellishment in that assessment? Maybe to help bolster your boy Tyson?

Ahem. This sounds exactly like your description of Tyson’s career. He dominated in 87-88 and then suddenly aged overnight before he fought Douglas. Or was it a prime Tyson that got his ass handed to him by Douglas?

tyson defintley wasnt peak BUT HE WAS NOWHERE SHOT. he was still a great fighter when he fought douglas. same with thomas, he wasnt peak but he was still a dangerous legit contender when he fought tyson. he was nowhere near shot.

btw tyson isnt my boy. i rate him # 10 greatest heavy of all time, thats not an unusual ranking.


- my bias for tyson certainly is nowhere near the level of ur bias against sonny liston who i think is a top 6 heavyweight of all time.

Thomas did not look impressive against Berbick, but I'm not totally sure it's because he was shot. Thomas was typical of the eighties heaveyweights who ran hot and cold. He looked imppressive against Quick Tillis only to come back with a dismal performance against Coezee, rebounded nicley for a couple of big wins only to fall back into a rut against Treavor Berbick. One other explanation is Berbick's greatest asset was the ability to drag opponents down to a low leavel causing them to look bad and fight a listless fight. I do think Thomas faded early in his career but still had something left in the Tyson fight. It can sometimes be a tough call to judge when a fighter is shot.

kick asner wrote:…I do think Thomas faded early in his career but still had something left in the Tyson fight.

Something, but not much. As you noted, throughout his career he was up and down, but clearly there were no great performances left in Thomas following the Weaver fight. Following that fight, Pinky did not win another significant fight in his career, and he performed poorly in those fights where the opponent was actually breathing. All those L’s that started with Berbick clearly indicate a slide

kick asner wrote:It can sometimes be a tough call to judge when a fighter is shot.

Absolutely. But as noted, when a world class HW starts losing whenever he fights decent opposition, it’s a pretty good indication that there’s very little left.

A fighter is past his prime when he can still fight the way he did in his prime, but not in every fight, or not as often as he could in his prime

good point


but then u have people like jack sharkey and jersey joe walcott who were inconsistent even in there primes

The Great John L wrote:

kick asner wrote:…I do think Thomas faded early in his career but still had something left in the Tyson fight.

Something, but not much. As you noted, throughout his career he was up and down, but clearly there were no great performances left in Thomas following the Weaver fight. Following that fight, Pinky did not win another significant fight in his career, and he performed poorly in those fights where the opponent was actually breathing. All those L’s that started with Berbick clearly indicate a slide

kick asner wrote:It can sometimes be a tough call to judge when a fighter is shot.

Absolutely. But as noted, when a world class HW starts losing whenever he fights decent opposition, it’s a pretty good indication that there’s very little left.

Points well taken but here is an example of what I meant when I said it can be a tough call to judge when a man is shot. Could compare it somewhat to Thomas. Not a mirror image comparison but enough to make the general point.


Take a guy like Ken Norton. Fought a great fight against a prime Holmes. Had no problem going the full fifteen rounds and was still throwing sharp meaningful punches till the end. A short time later in his next fight he bumbles around the ring until he gets knocked out by a hard punching but limited Earnie Shavers. Looks very poor in his next fight Against an even more limited fighter in Scott Ladouex.

Now he was nowhere near shot against Holmes. But was he shot against Shavers and Ladouex a very short time later? He shouldn't have been, he didn't look fat or out of shape. Is it likely a man could be shot right after he fought the fight of his life? To say he was is to say he completly broke down physically in a short time span for no apparent reason. But to say he wasn't is to say he displayed none of his skill against opposition he should have been supperior to. So it just seems it is a tough call to judge when a man is shot.

kick asner wrote:Take a guy like Ken Norton. Fought a great fight against a prime Holmes. Had no problem going the full fifteen rounds and was still throwing sharp meaningful punches till the end. A short time later in his next fight he bumbles around the ring until he gets knocked out by a hard punching but limited Earnie Shavers. Looks very poor in his next fight Against an even more limited fighter in Scott Ladouex.

Now he was nowhere near shot against Holmes. But was he shot against Shavers and Ladouex a very short time later? He shouldn't have been, he didn't look fat or out of shape. Is it likely a man could be shot right after he fought the fight of his life? To say he was is to say he completly broke down physically in a short time span for no apparent reason. But to say he wasn't is to say he displayed none of his skill against opposition he should have been supperior to. So it just seems it is a tough call to judge when a man is shot.

The difference is that Norton looked pretty good in the fights prior to Holmes, while Pinky was on a noticeable decline in the Berbick fight and the subsequent fights against the 3 stooges leading up to Tyson. He didn’t look very good in any of those fights, and this continued in the Tyson fight and until the end of his career.

Maybe Pinky wasn't completely shot, but he was a distant shadow of what he was 3-4 years earlier.

Decagon wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

A fighter is past his prime when he can still fight the way he did in his prime, but not in every fight, or not as often as he could in his prime

good point


but then u have people like jack sharkey and jersey joe walcott who were inconsistent even in there primes

Walcott was inconsistent in the 1930s and 1940s because of economic factors. Looking at Walcott's last six fights, he had a knockout win over Charles, a disputed points win over Charles, two points losses and two KO losses. On paper, he looks shot, especially since he was almost 37 when he started his final run, but he did have prime performances against Charles (III) and Marciano (I), and of course, he won the World Heavyweight Championship. In Charles IV, he was flat-footed, inactive and slow, despite showing up in Evander-Holyfield-like condition. In Marciano II, he was simply unable to mount a championship fight, and he retired.

Sharkey, who was in his prime in the 1920s, was, unfortunately, stupid. He was lucky enough in Schmelling II to get a sympathetic judge and referee who would let the title change hands in a close fight, but after that, he stopped losing fights because he was stupid, and started losing fights because he simply wasn't good enough.

true, though i do think walcott looked better in charles IV then u attest too. walcott fought a lot more aggresivley in that fight and let his hands go alot more. remember the full fight is not on film so its hard to judge base on the small rounds we have. perhaps there were other rounds where walcott looked much better. but i didnt think he looked flatfooted like u say, he did outpoint charles didnt he? i mean i certainly didnt see walcott fight flatfooted against marciano 4 months later. perhaps walcott and charles both had an off night in there 4th fight then.




btw i have film of walcott vs hein ten hoff in 1950. it was another prime like preformance. hoff was no bum, he had decent skills and a hard punch and was 6'5 220lb. walcott completley tamed and outclassed the giant. he totally outboxed him in the little footage i have. walcott kept nailing hein ten hoff with sucker right hands and walcott was shuffling, dancing, boxing circles around the giant. this fight was the one right before layne too

KOJOE90 wrote:With reference to Pinky moving away from the drug scene in his teens, now Overhand don't gat all excited and Overheated if I've been missinformed here but didn't Pinky have a brief drugs relapse around 1989 after his lose to Holyfield?

In an article in KO magazine a few years back Thomas said he went on a drug-binge for several days after losing to Holyfield. The article pointed out how Thomas now had completely turned his life around, kicked drugs and was helping youngsters.

Holmes had a much longer reign than Tyson with far more defenses. Tyson does not come close to what Holmes accomplished as champion.

yea it appears both knew eachothers styles so well by the 4th fight it turned into a boring fight. i believe that the brutal KO loss charles recently suffered was still blooming in charles mind and he didnt want to take any chances in there. i believe walcott also fought a better fighter than in the first two, he fought more aggresivley. this enabled him to score more points not to mention walcott was a helluva puncher. walcott staggered charles every time he landed on him in the first two fights( round 14 charles-walcott I) but the difference is walcott didnt follow up the attack with combinations trying to take charles out like he did in some of his later fights. alot of ringsiders thought charles won though. from wut i hear, it was a close fight and walcott came on strong in the end and charles faded down the stretch and his lack of aggresion cost him the fight. ..........



take a look at this clip decagon


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMLydNQq ... %20walcott

marciano-walcott I


even in the 12th round walcott is still moving very fast, still boxing on his toes and fighting aggresively. take a look at that short sharp left hook to the body walcott counters marciano with.

also notice how walcott does his fast shuffle right away and then comes back with some fast jabs followed by nice little body shift which throws rocky off guard. of course this brings me to another point regarding marcianos underated defense, watch how he slips those jabs.

even the announcer says at the end of the 12th "you would think walcott will get tired sometime, but he never does"





walcott had so much confidence entering this fight. hey this fight is a benchmark to all u athletes out there how importan "self confidence" is. when u have a lot of confidence, u usually preform better. walcott did not believe he could lose the fight.

Many people feel Spinks lost both of his fights to Holmes so a Holmes fan has little reason to try to upgrade Spinks. Rather, they can simply point out that Spinks did not truly beat Holmes.

Cojimar 1945 wrote:Holmes had a much longer reign than Tyson with far more defenses. Tyson does not come close to what Holmes accomplished as champion.

hey may have had far more defenses, but many of those guys were unranked scrubs who had no business fighting for the title. i would have rather seen holmes have 10 title defenses but take on some of those alpha champs instead of the scott le douxs and lucien rodriguez's.

tyson may have had only 8 title defenses, but everone was against a top contender and 8 of the 9 were against guys who were or would become champions. tysons title defenses were filled with some of the best 1980s heavyweights

tyson also dominated all of these guys, no controversy


holmes struggled with some, and never granted rematches






i give holmes the edge, but tyson belongs up there

i agree holmes won the rematch

Tyson was an awsome fighter, one of the very best, but only for about 4 years or so. He beat almost all the best in the division at the time, but once his training regime changed, and he lost his mobility, he quickly became a fairly ordinary HW, albeit one with a good punch. Holmes had a far longer career trajectory, maybe sometimes involving less able fighters, but some very good ones as well, and held the title for 8 years in all. I really see what Tyson could have done to have a reign of that sort of length, he would have slowed up eventually, even if Cus D'Amarto was still traning him, and then he would have become as vunerable as he did anyway. As it turned out, the process was quickened because of all the disruption to his personal life and preperation.

wouter wrote:

KOJOE90 wrote:With reference to Pinky moving away from the drug scene in his teens, now Overhand don't gat all excited and Overheated if I've been missinformed here but didn't Pinky have a brief drugs relapse around 1989 after his lose to Holyfield?

In an article in KO magazine a few years back Thomas said he went on a drug-binge for several days after losing to Holyfield. The article pointed out how Thomas now had completely turned his life around, kicked drugs and was helping youngsters.

Thanks for that wouter.

Getting back to the original thread question. I really hope Pinky is alright and not lasped back into bad ways. the way I look at it there are three most likely options.

(1( He is back on drugs of some type.
(2) He has some other medical complaint.
(3) He is overtraing/under eating and may have a body image or eating disorder.

Or we may just all be completely wrong.

Who cares? Thomas symbolizes everything that was bad about heavyweights in the 80's prior to Tyson, a one-armed, overrated ex-junkie.
He was fornicating awful.

bennie wrote:Who cares? Thomas symbolizes everything that was bad about heavyweights in the 80's prior to Tyson, a one-armed, overrated ex-junkie.
He was smeg awful.

Thmas wasnt a bad, one - armed heavyweight. The man beat a well prepared Witherspoon, drew with a vastly experienced fighter in Coetzee when Pinklon was still somewhat green, stopped Tillis and also knocked out Weaver with one of the best right hands you'll ever see - The Weaver fight showed that Pinklon wasnt just a one armed fighter.

Thomas had a terrific strong jab and even in the Tyson fight he nailed Tyson with a perfect 1 - 2 combination at the end of the first and Thomas still had some left in the Tyson bout.
The Berbick fight however was a different matter but Berbick does very well with boxers, beating Greg Page winning nearly every round in my view and also knocked out John Tate who was another good boxer. Loosing to Berbick is no shame.

After the Weaver win KO magazine installed Pinky as #1 in the world rankings and demoted Holmes to #2. I thought it was premature but KO were always quick to push someone into greatess before they'd earned it.

Holmes' brush with Witherspoon already had many believing that Larry could no longer tame the younger lions. Thomas's win over spoon along with the dramatic KO of an old Weaver had many believing he was the future of the division.

To be fair Mike Weaver was at the end of his career and the manner of the win flattered Thomas. It was obvious in the Berbick fight that he had slipped from his win over Spoon.

When Pinky fought Tyson he wasn't at his best but he wasn't shot, faded might be the most accurate assessment. He was still a good opponent though. Tyson respected him and used his jab to good effect. Tyson's win over Thomas was probably his best performance.

RazorKO wrote:

bennie wrote:Who cares? Thomas symbolizes everything that was bad about heavyweights in the 80's prior to Tyson, a one-armed, overrated ex-junkie.
He was smeg awful.

Thmas wasnt a bad, one - armed heavyweight. The man beat a well prepared Witherspoon, drew with a vastly experienced fighter in Coetzee when Pinklon was still somewhat green, stopped Tillis and also knocked out Weaver with one of the best right hands you'll ever see - The Weaver fight showed that Pinklon wasnt just a one armed fighter.

Thomas had a terrific strong jab and even in the Tyson fight he nailed Tyson with a perfect 1 - 2 combination at the end of the first and Thomas still had some left in the Tyson bout.
The Berbick fight however was a different matter but Berbick does very well with boxers, beating Greg Page winning nearly every round in my view and also knocked out John Tate who was another good boxer. Loosing to Berbick is no shame.

As Tyson said after someone suggested Berbick was a good scalp: "You think Berbick is class!!"

overhand_right wrote:Probably the 1000th thread to be ruined by you guys having a childish frickin argument over how great or not great Tyson was. Thanks guys.

These Tyson threads always go round in circles with no conclusion & how you lot distorted a thread about the health of Pinklon Thomas into a thread comparing Tyson & Holmes opposition is both depressing & pathetic.

well said

thomas was fucked up by the time of the tyson and holyfield fights

dominic calder smith's book - whatever it was called, the long round or something - goes into real detail

thomas had the 'burroughs' look to his face before the tyson fight