Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 20 Aug 2024, 13:27
by keithmoonhangover
apollo creed wrote: ↑20 Aug 2024, 09:24
Buster was very diplomat. Be sure that he wanted the rematch but as I said, Tyson's handlers took Tyson to another route and rebuilt his KO artist profile. What I'm trying to say is that King didn't want to risk again their golden goose against an already confident Buster or other tough fighter like Bowe, Foreman, Tua or McCall. It was all about business and protecting their investment i.e Tyson. At that time Tyson's handlers were so confident that Tyson would KO Buster that they didn't put a rematch clause in the contract which was a foolish mistake and when Mike got stopped by Buster the reality check stroke them hard. Anyway , even after that fiasco they found a good way to milk Mike's KO artist profile and make millions. Contrary to the stories from the internet that King was a very slimy-sly-villian, King made Tyson super-rich because King was a very savvy businessman. It wasn't King fault that Mike blew up most of his money and had a bad entourage, full of lychees and hyenas.
But where's your evidence, darling? Don't you have any?
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 20 Aug 2024, 14:05
by Caractacus
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 21 Aug 2024, 07:11
by apollo creed
You have to read between the lines and stop eating all the internet subjective stories. People are so gullible and believe whatever the internet say to them.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
apollo creed wrote: ↑20 Aug 2024, 09:24
Buster was very diplomat. Be sure that he wanted the rematch but as I said, Tyson's handlers took Tyson to another route and rebuilt his KO artist profile. What I'm trying to say is that King didn't want to risk again their golden goose against an already confident Buster or other tough fighter like Bowe, Foreman, Tua or McCall. It was all about business and protecting their investment i.e Tyson. At that time Tyson's handlers were so confident that Tyson would KO Buster that they didn't put a rematch clause in the contract which was a foolish mistake and when Mike got stopped by Buster the reality check stroke them hard. Anyway , even after that fiasco they found a good way to milk Mike's KO artist profile and make millions. Contrary to the stories from the internet that King was a very slimy-sly-villian, King made Tyson super-rich because King was a very savvy businessman. It wasn't King fault that Mike blew up most of his money and had a bad entourage, full of lychees and hyenas.
But where's your evidence, darling? Don't you have any?
Hey son, stop being such a gullible-wuss. They got very rich from bulding up the hype.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
apollo creed wrote: ↑20 Aug 2024, 09:24
Buster was very diplomat. Be sure that he wanted the rematch but as I said, Tyson's handlers took Tyson to another route and rebuilt his KO artist profile. What I'm trying to say is that King didn't want to risk again their golden goose against an already confident Buster or other tough fighter like Bowe, Foreman, Tua or McCall. It was all about business and protecting their investment i.e Tyson. At that time Tyson's handlers were so confident that Tyson would KO Buster that they didn't put a rematch clause in the contract which was a foolish mistake and when Mike got stopped by Buster the reality check stroke them hard. Anyway , even after that fiasco they found a good way to milk Mike's KO artist profile and make millions. Contrary to the stories from the internet that King was a very slimy-sly-villian, King made Tyson super-rich because King was a very savvy businessman. It wasn't King fault that Mike blew up most of his money and had a bad entourage, full of lychees and hyenas.
But where's your evidence, darling? Don't you have any?
Hey son, stop being such a gullible-wuss. They got very rich from bulding up the hype.
So that'll be a no.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑17 Aug 2024, 16:46
He just said that he hated Tyson, and you said that Tyson was his hero.
It is possible to rate a guy highly whom you don't like if you think he should be rated highly. Actually, that is what people should do. Tyson was a sleaze. No question about it. But he was a lot better than David Tau or Tim Witherspoon or Glassjaw and his brother who never beat anyone worth mentioning. These should not be tough calls.
Alt, just admit it that your 'invincible' hero was exposed by Buster.
Go back and read some of my posts from over the years. I can't stand Tyson. Rooted against him. He wasn't invincible. He lost to Douglas fair and square. Lost to Holyfield fair and square.
But he was clearly better than David Tua. Absurd to argue otherwise.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑17 Aug 2024, 16:46
He just said that he hated Tyson, and you said that Tyson was his hero.
It is possible to rate a guy highly whom you don't like if you think he should be rated highly. Actually, that is what people should do. Tyson was a sleaze. No question about it. But he was a lot better than David Tau or Tim Witherspoon or Glassjaw and his brother who never beat anyone worth mentioning. These should not be tough calls.
Alt, just admit it that your 'invincible' hero was exposed by Buster.
Go back and read some of my posts from over the years. I can't stand Tyson. Rooted against him. He wasn't invincible. He lost to Douglas fair and square. Lost to Holyfield fair and square.
But he was clearly better than David Tua. Absurd to argue otherwise.
He was just cleverly matched by King before he got stopped by Buster. Imo Tua was a stronger and tougher fighter than Tyson but with no marketing and hype behind him.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 21 Aug 2024, 14:59
by Ambling Alp II
No that isn't what happened. Tyson was not ducking people in the 1980s. Tyson fought most the best around at the time. there were several guys who had some talent but who were inconsistent. Buster Douglas actually was one of them.
Tyson beat Berbick, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Tubbs, Bruno, Williams. they weren't legends by any means, but good fighters. This dwarfs what Tua did. there were other guys at about this level he did not fight, (Witherspoon, Dokes, Page etc.) . however, he couldn't fight everyone. He was quite busy as it was.
Douglas had his ups and downs before fighting Tyson. He lost to Tucker and Jessie Ferguson for example, but beat McCall, Page, and Berbick. He fought a great fight and Tyson and deserved the win.
Tua was inconsistent. At times, he was aggressive and hard to beat. Other times, all he did was stand around, throwing 1 or 2 wild left hooks a round and doing little else.
Should have beaten guys like Maskeav and Oquendo much easier.
He looked terrible against Lewis. Did virtually nothing the last half of the fight. He did not make Lewis work hard at all. Looked bad against Byrd as well.
Tyson was much more consistent and threw a lot more combinations and could hurt a guy with either and. I can't believe anyone would think Tua was better. There are many fighters better than Tua and not as good as Tyson.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 21 Aug 2024, 15:25
by Controversial
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑21 Aug 2024, 14:59
No that isn't what happened. Tyson was not ducking people in the 1980s. Tyson fought most the best around at the time. there were several guys who had some talent but who were inconsistent. Buster Douglas actually was one of them.
Tyson beat Berbick, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Tubbs, Bruno, Williams. they weren't legends by any means, but good fighters. This dwarfs what Tua did. there were other guys at about this level he did not fight, (Witherspoon, Dokes, Page etc.) . however, he couldn't fight everyone. He was quite busy as it was.
Douglas had his ups and downs before fighting Tyson. He lost to Tucker and Jessie Ferguson for example, but beat McCall, Page, and Berbick. He fought a great fight and Tyson and deserved the win.
Tua was inconsistent. At times, he was aggressive and hard to beat. Other times, all he did was stand around, throwing 1 or 2 wild left hooks a round and doing little else.
Should have beaten guys like Maskeav and Oquendo much easier.
He looked terrible against Lewis. Did virtually nothing the last half of the fight. He did not make Lewis work hard at all. Looked bad against Byrd as well.
Tyson was much more consistent and threw a lot more combinations and could hurt a guy with either and. I can't believe anyone would think Tua was better. There are many fighters better than Tua and not as good as Tyson.
He's trolling, don't waste your time
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Hey son, stop being such a gullible-wuss. They got very rich from bulding up the hype.
So that'll be a no.
Are you a sheep? Always take what you read without passing through the filter of your mind? Or maybe you don't have one?
I believe the words that Tyson, Douglas and Holyfield said in interviews at the time. I believe direct quotes in reputable magazines and newspapers. What I don't believe is your imaginary and completely fictitious nonsense, where you profess to know what Tyson was thinking in 1990 without a single shred of evidence to back it up.
You're a loon or a troll or completely delusional. Your the boxing equivalent of Walter Mitty with a dash of Rupert Pupkin for good measure.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Bowe's best opponent was obivously Holyfield, But he beat, not once but twice. Ahd lost in a great fight in their second by a very close decision that could have gone his way. He beat Tubbs when he was inexperienced. Stopped Seldon in the first round. At a certain you have to actually watch the fights and see his ability. And Bowe did not avoid anyone. He signed to Lennox Lewis. He was set to fight Mercer as well, but Mercer was upset by Ferguson.
You are comparing Klitschko losses to Brewster and Sanders to Holyfield's losses to Bowe and Moorer? How stupid can you be?
Brewster and Sanders were not even ranked in the top 10 when Klitschko got beat by them. Moorer and Bowe were highly ranked contenders.
Klitschko suffered embarrassing knockouts. Holyfield lost to Bowe in a great fight and the loss to Moorer was close.
Klitschko also somehow got stopped by Ross Purrity as well.
Again, watch the fights sometime. Watch Klitschko get humiliated by Ross Purrity. Then watch Holyfield against Moorer. See who looks better.
Watch Klitschko get embarrassed against Brewster. Then watch Holyfield lose to Bowe in their first fight. See who looks better.
Start using some common sense.
I can see based on his fights that Bowe was very easy to hit which may be part of the reason he didn't face big punchers like Lewis, Tyson, Tua, Sanders, etc. Holyfield was probably a better matchup because he lacked the power of these other guys and was less able to capitalize on Bowe's defensive liabilities. He was good offensively but very subpar defensively. Also we can't credit him with fighting Mercer, Lewis, etc when the fights didn't happen.
Yes, the manner of the Sanders and Brewster losses were worse than Holyfield's losses. I just pointed out that the winners in all four cases didn't do a lot at heavyweight outside of those wins. The manner of the losses are almost identical to Lewis's losses to McCall and Rahman however.
It's not Bowe's fault Lewis, Tyson didn't fight him.
Corrie Sanders? Wasn't even a ranked contender until after he beat Klitschko.
Yes the losses that Lewis had to Rahman and McCall should count against him. However, they were a lot better than Sanders, Brewster and frikkin Ross Purrity. And of course, the wins that Lewis had were much, much more impressive than Klitschko.
Let me make this clear. you have to count the wins and the losses. to a lesser extent, factor in how competitive the fights were. Take into consideration the stages of the fighters careers as well as their opponents.
Lewis, Bowe, and Tyson were a lot better than the Klitschkos or Tim Witherspoon.
Rahman lost to Ruiz, and worse Oleg Maskaev TWICE. McCall lost to Bruno and barely beat Holmes at 45 and pre-prime lost to Hunter and Norris. Those losses are at best marginally better than Wlad's losses. To believe otherwise you have to simply ignore their entire careers outside of beating Lewis.
Wlad was out of prime vs Purrity, it's no more relevant than Tyson-McBride
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 22 Aug 2024, 04:14
by keithmoonhangover
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑21 Aug 2024, 21:33
Wlad was out of prime vs Purrity, it's no more relevant than Tyson-McBride
Tosh.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑21 Aug 2024, 21:33
Wlad was out of prime vs Purrity, it's no more relevant than Tyson-McBride
Tosh.
I agree not the same. Klitschko was 24-0 and 22 years old, Tyson was 50-5 and a few days away from being 39.
Puritty was no mug, he was 250lbs, a big puncher (22 KOs in 24 wins) with a decent chin who hadn't been stopped at that point. Upsets happen at HW when big punchers are involved, we only have to look at Lewis to see that.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Are you a sheep? Always take what you read without passing through the filter of your mind? Or maybe you don't have one?
I believe the words that Tyson, Douglas and Holyfield said in interviews at the time. I believe direct quotes in reputable magazines and newspapers. What I don't believe is your imaginary and completely fictitious nonsense, where you profess to know what Tyson was thinking in 1990 without a single shred of evidence to back it up.
You're a loon or a troll or completely delusional. Your the boxing equivalent of Walter Mitty with a dash of Rupert Pupkin for good measure.
You're getting winding up so easy, son. You and your other alts can't refrain to reply me everytime, that it amuse me. Even if you won't admit it, you must admire this honest assessment about Tyson, otherwise you'd not respond to me everytime.
Their actions spoke louder than their words. Keep believing the words.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑21 Aug 2024, 14:59
No that isn't what happened. Tyson was not ducking people in the 1980s. Tyson fought most the best around at the time. there were several guys who had some talent but who were inconsistent. Buster Douglas actually was one of them.
Tyson beat Berbick, Smith, Thomas, Tucker, Tubbs, Bruno, Williams. they weren't legends by any means, but good fighters. This dwarfs what Tua did. there were other guys at about this level he did not fight, (Witherspoon, Dokes, Page etc.) . however, he couldn't fight everyone. He was quite busy as it was.
Douglas had his ups and downs before fighting Tyson. He lost to Tucker and Jessie Ferguson for example, but beat McCall, Page, and Berbick. He fought a great fight and Tyson and deserved the win.
Tua was inconsistent. At times, he was aggressive and hard to beat. Other times, all he did was stand around, throwing 1 or 2 wild left hooks a round and doing little else.
Should have beaten guys like Maskeav and Oquendo much easier.
He looked terrible against Lewis. Did virtually nothing the last half of the fight. He did not make Lewis work hard at all. Looked bad against Byrd as well.
Tyson was much more consistent and threw a lot more combinations and could hurt a guy with either and. I can't believe anyone would think Tua was better. There are many fighters better than Tua and not as good as Tyson.
He's trolling, don't waste your time
speaking facts aint trolling, son. the era of mid 80's hw division was a weak one, Tyson was cleverly marketed by King, Buster derailed Mike's hypetrain, Holy and Lennox beat him too, Mike's handlers didn't push for an immediate rematch with Buster to avenge that heavy loss, its all there.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑21 Aug 2024, 21:33
Wlad was out of prime vs Purrity, it's no more relevant than Tyson-McBride
Tosh.
He was an unranked prospect years away from scoring quality wins. It seems a massive stretch to claim the result means anything because nobody is arguing the 1998 version of Wlad was near his best. Bringing up the fight reeks of having a biased agenda and not being objective.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑21 Aug 2024, 21:33
Wlad was out of prime vs Purrity, it's no more relevant than Tyson-McBride
Tosh.
He was an unranked prospect years away from scoring quality wins. It seems a massive stretch to claim the result means anything because nobody is arguing the 1998 version of Wlad was near his best. Bringing up the fight reeks of having a biased agenda and not being objective.
So a prospect can lose as many times coming up as he likes and it doesn't mean anything? I mean, Wlad was an Olympic champion in his 25th professional fight and got battered by a guy with thirteen losses.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 23 Aug 2024, 10:45
by Ambling Alp II
Agreed. Absurd that people would try to pretend that this fight should not count against klitschko. A guy in his 25th pro fight has to win that fight.
Love the comparisons between Klitschkos other losses and Leiws' loeeses.
Yes Lewis lost to McCall and Rahman. Yes those fights should count against him. However they aren't nearly as bad as Klitscjkos losses to Sanders and Bewster.
McCall and Rahman were at least top 10 contenders in a good era. They each had their ups and downs, they had some losses and some good wins. They were decent fighters.
Sanders was not in the Top 10 when he embarrassed Klitschko. He never beat anyone worth mentioning before or after that fight.
Brewster was almost a complete unknown when he stopped Klitschko. He had no big wins and had lost to C level fighters like Eitenne and Shufford.
In a nutshell, Lewis had two losses that were bad for an ATG.
Klitschko had three really, really embarrassing losses.
Not even close.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 23 Aug 2024, 12:06
by BroughtonRulesRefuge
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑23 Aug 2024, 10:45
Agreed. Absurd that people would try to pretend that this fight should not count against klitschko. A guy in his 25th pro fight has to win that fight.
Love the comparisons between Klitschkos other losses and Leiws' loeeses.
Yes Lewis lost to McCall and Rahman. Yes those fights should count against him. However they aren't nearly as bad as Klitscjkos losses to Sanders and Bewster.
McCall and Rahman were at least top 10 contenders in a good era. They each had their ups and downs, they had some losses and some good wins. They were decent fighters.
Sanders was not in the Top 10 when he embarrassed Klitschko. He never beat anyone worth mentioning before or after that fight.
Brewster was almost a complete unknown when he stopped Klitschko. He had no big wins and had lost to C level fighters like Eitenne and Shufford.
In a nutshell, Lewis had two losses that were bad for an ATG.
Klitschko had three really, really embarrassing losses.
Not even close.
- Now there you go again, alpsy. Lewie was one punched to Bolivia via Timbuktu twice...
Yup, so Lewie ducked Sanders as did most heavies because Sanders was a powerfully dangerous fast starting southpaw in a sport that traditionally ducked southpaws. In spite of being a popular fighter in South Africa's black districts like Coetzee was, he was Internationally boycotted, hence his starring in Rugby and Golf to pay the bills.
Wlad was drugged in the Brewster fight clearly. Vit and Steward said so, esp obvious after serious abnormalities in the post fight drug test that was conveniently lost by the horrendously corrupt Vegas Commish and Margie Goodman. She ended up starting the fake BALCO VADA testing along with BALCO Vic after serving time for felony drug violations that made international news that also ensnared the likes of Shane Mosely and assorted high flying Olympians along with BALCO Barry Bonds.
I watched that fight with eagle eyes after international bookies suspended betting on the Brewster fight after a huge number of wagers on Brewster who was being easily outboxed when not getting pulverized. It was the easiest fight of Wlad's career when suddenly he couldn't hold his hands up and bouncing off ropes to stay away from Brewster who was so inept he couldn't land anything of note.
Really this is one of the dumberest Boxrec threads ever, but of course with boxing being so out of fashion with sports fans because of naked corruption, remaining predominate boxing fans tend to be on the lower IQ disorder of mankind.
Bottom line, Tyson cleaned out the Giant Sucking Sound of the single belt holder Lar who of course dropped Rockies jockstrap on his stupid broken feet when he faced his first champion having won his title in the ring. That launched the lucrative careers of Field, Big Dummy Bowe, and Lewie, the last gasp of American boxing until the Kbros took over some 25 years ago still bearing fruit with Usyk...
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑23 Aug 2024, 10:45
Agreed. Absurd that people would try to pretend that this fight should not count against klitschko. A guy in his 25th pro fight has to win that fight.
Love the comparisons between Klitschkos other losses and Leiws' loeeses.
Yes Lewis lost to McCall and Rahman. Yes those fights should count against him. However they aren't nearly as bad as Klitscjkos losses to Sanders and Bewster.
McCall and Rahman were at least top 10 contenders in a good era. They each had their ups and downs, they had some losses and some good wins. They were decent fighters.
Sanders was not in the Top 10 when he embarrassed Klitschko. He never beat anyone worth mentioning before or after that fight.
Brewster was almost a complete unknown when he stopped Klitschko. He had no big wins and had lost to C level fighters like Eitenne and Shufford.
In a nutshell, Lewis had two losses that were bad for an ATG.
Klitschko had three really, really embarrassing losses.
Not even close.
- Now there you go again, alpsy. Lewie was one punched to Bolivia via Timbuktu twice...
Yup, so Lewie ducked Sanders as did most heavies because Sanders was a powerfully dangerous fast starting southpaw in a sport that traditionally ducked southpaws. In spite of being a popular fighter in South Africa's black districts like Coetzee was, he was Internationally boycotted, hence his starring in Rugby and Golf to pay the bills.
Wlad was drugged in the Brewster fight clearly. Vit and Steward said so, esp obvious after serious abnormalities in the post fight drug test that was conveniently lost by the horrendously corrupt Vegas Commish and Margie Goodman. She ended up starting the fake BALCO VADA testing along with BALCO Vic after serving time for felony drug violations that made international news that also ensnared the likes of Shane Mosely and assorted high flying Olympians along with BALCO Barry Bonds.
I watched that fight with eagle eyes after international bookies suspended betting on the Brewster fight after a huge number of wagers on Brewster who was being easily outboxed when not getting pulverized. It was the easiest fight of Wlad's career when suddenly he couldn't hold his hands up and bouncing off ropes to stay away from Brewster who was so inept he couldn't land anything of note.
Really this is one of the dumberest Boxrec threads ever, but of course with boxing being so out of fashion with sports fans because of naked corruption, remaining predominate boxing fans tend to be on the lower IQ disorder of mankind.
Bottom line, Tyson cleaned out the Giant Sucking Sound of the single belt holder Lar who of course dropped Rockies jockstrap on his stupid broken feet when he faced his first champion having won his title in the ring. That launched the lucrative careers of Field, Big Dummy Bowe, and Lewie, the last gasp of American boxing until the Kbros took over some 25 years ago still bearing fruit with Usyk...
That is the best bit of creative fiction I've read in a very long time. You should write a book. Well done.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
He was an unranked prospect years away from scoring quality wins. It seems a massive stretch to claim the result means anything because nobody is arguing the 1998 version of Wlad was near his best. Bringing up the fight reeks of having a biased agenda and not being objective.
So a prospect can lose as many times coming up as he likes and it doesn't mean anything? I mean, Wlad was an Olympic champion in his 25th professional fight and got battered by a guy with thirteen losses.
If he's a prospect years away from a ranking or beating anyone relevant than yeah I wouldn't think the fight means much. Logically if non-prime fights count than you would have to count McBride and Williams for Tyson because Tyson did in fact lose to both men.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
He was an unranked prospect years away from scoring quality wins. It seems a massive stretch to claim the result means anything because nobody is arguing the 1998 version of Wlad was near his best. Bringing up the fight reeks of having a biased agenda and not being objective.
So a prospect can lose as many times coming up as he likes and it doesn't mean anything? I mean, Wlad was an Olympic champion in his 25th professional fight and got battered by a guy with thirteen losses.
If he's a prospect years away from a ranking or beating anyone relevant than yeah I wouldn't think the fight means much. Logically if non-prime fights count than you would have to count McBride and Williams for Tyson because Tyson did in fact lose to both men.
But surely the boxer's punch resistance decreases over time and at the end of their career, there ability to take a punch is much worse than in their days as a prospect? Unless they have a cast iron chin, the punches take their toll.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Posted: 24 Aug 2024, 08:57
by Controversial
Klitschko was a young hungry fit fighter, who was fighting regularly and unbeaten so had that unbeaten mentality, completely different to Tyson who was not only past it, wasn’t in that same shape anymore, was fighting once a year for several years and his desire hadn’t been there for many years either.
Re: Mike Tyson - a big example of great marketing and hype
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑23 Aug 2024, 10:45
Agreed. Absurd that people would try to pretend that this fight should not count against klitschko. A guy in his 25th pro fight has to win that fight.
Love the comparisons between Klitschkos other losses and Leiws' loeeses.
Yes Lewis lost to McCall and Rahman. Yes those fights should count against him. However they aren't nearly as bad as Klitscjkos losses to Sanders and Bewster.
McCall and Rahman were at least top 10 contenders in a good era. They each had their ups and downs, they had some losses and some good wins. They were decent fighters.
Sanders was not in the Top 10 when he embarrassed Klitschko. He never beat anyone worth mentioning before or after that fight.
Brewster was almost a complete unknown when he stopped Klitschko. He had no big wins and had lost to C level fighters like Eitenne and Shufford.
In a nutshell, Lewis had two losses that were bad for an ATG.
Klitschko had three really, really embarrassing losses.
Not even close.
- Now there you go again, alpsy. Lewie was one punched to Bolivia via Timbuktu twice...
Yup, so Lewie ducked Sanders as did most heavies because Sanders was a powerfully dangerous fast starting southpaw in a sport that traditionally ducked southpaws. In spite of being a popular fighter in South Africa's black districts like Coetzee was, he was Internationally boycotted, hence his starring in Rugby and Golf to pay the bills.
Wlad was drugged in the Brewster fight clearly. Vit and Steward said so, esp obvious after serious abnormalities in the post fight drug test that was conveniently lost by the horrendously corrupt Vegas Commish and Margie Goodman. She ended up starting the fake BALCO VADA testing along with BALCO Vic after serving time for felony drug violations that made international news that also ensnared the likes of Shane Mosely and assorted high flying Olympians along with BALCO Barry Bonds.
I watched that fight with eagle eyes after international bookies suspended betting on the Brewster fight after a huge number of wagers on Brewster who was being easily outboxed when not getting pulverized. It was the easiest fight of Wlad's career when suddenly he couldn't hold his hands up and bouncing off ropes to stay away from Brewster who was so inept he couldn't land anything of note.
Really this is one of the dumberest Boxrec threads ever, but of course with boxing being so out of fashion with sports fans because of naked corruption, remaining predominate boxing fans tend to be on the lower IQ disorder of mankind.
Bottom line, Tyson cleaned out the Giant Sucking Sound of the single belt holder Lar who of course dropped Rockies jockstrap on his stupid broken feet when he faced his first champion having won his title in the ring. That launched the lucrative careers of Field, Big Dummy Bowe, and Lewie, the last gasp of American boxing until the Kbros took over some 25 years ago still bearing fruit with Usyk...
That is the best bit of creative fiction I've read in a very long time. You should write a book. Well done.
- I have written a book, several, not that I go around hoisting myself on my own petard like you doodoo.
Betting on the fight was suspended the week or two before the fight because of the suspected fix. It was Wlad's easiest fight until the likely Russian manufactured drug took him him down. Drugging folks in bars has a long history of Mickey Finns, now something of a pandemic in general modern society according to the press accounts over the years.
I was watching at a small hotel where I had become friends with the manager who was in Shane Mosely's corner when he was coming up the boxing ratings. He was busy during the fight and so later asked me how it went, so I told him to stay put as HBO was gonna replay the whole thing.
At the point of Wlad's mysterious collapse absent taking any punishment to speak off, he jumped up and said he was drugged. I'll take his independent confirmation along with Vitali and Steward over a bunch of addled soft lads any day.
Net result is settled history in Nobody in boxing has dominated since Joe Louis dominated heavyweight boxing that past his best form Wlad approached. Emasculated singing in soprano boxing fans ain't a good look, but hey ho, gender surgery is lucrative these days and they got miracle drugs to help the transition...
