BoxRec

Mr E wrote:I don't know why these kinds of discussions always need to become hostile on this board but c'est la vie. To respond.

This is boxing, not track and field.

Brilliant. Good thing you pointed that out.

We're talking experience and accomplishments, which is what matters in boxing.

Nonsense. We were discussing a hypothetical boxing tournament, in which what matters is who would have beaten whom. Many things "matter in boxing," depending on the context of the discussion.

Watch a prime Quarry, like the Spencer fight and tell me that Ike was as fast as Quarry.

As between Quarry and Ike, I wouldn't want to live on the difference, that's for sure. Quarry was no speed-demon, your evident wide-eyed fan worship notwithstanding. And I do think Ike was probably faster than Lyle and Shavers were.

TI couldn't agree more. Tua and Byrd were both very good HWs, probably two of the better HWs of the late 90's, behind Lewis. Maybe if Ike had continued beating good HWs he could be mentioned as a guy that would have stood a chance against the names you throw around so cavalierly.

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't believe for one minute you would bet a month's mortgage on any of these guys to beat Ike Ibeabuchi if this were more than mere fantasy and somebody gave you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.

"Especially" Shavers? I guess KOing Ellis, Young, Bugner, Norton, Smith and Williams, among others, doesn't compare well to Tua and Byrd?

That's an inane comment. He also lost to Ron Stander, Bob Stallings, didn't make it a single round against Quarry, collapsed against Tex Cobb and Bernardo Mercado, etc. Point is, Shavers was a thunderous puncher, with some skill, limited speed and limited durability. And, yes, I'd put a lot of money on Ibeabuchi to hand him his head. Less so with Lyle, who was better than Shavers, but I'd still make Ike the favorite.

Nobody is saying that Ike may not have developed into a top HW, but a close win over Tua and a stoppage of Byrd doesn't compare favorably to fighting top HWs for a decade, during what was arguably the best HW era, which is exactly what Quarry, Lyle and Shavers did. Some of us just like to see accomplishments, rather than possibilities.

The question is not where they rate in terms of historical significance or whatever sort of romantic notion you may have of overall 'worth.' The question is do you really think Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle could have beaten Ike Ibeabuchi in a fight? For cryin' out loud, he was 235-240 (I forget exactly) in shape and he had some real skills. You would seriously take 210 pound Earnie Shavers, who got knocked out a dozen times in his career, to "stomp" him, as in the fight would be no contest??????

Goodnight, Irene wrote:My favourite part was when John L. pointed out experience & accomplishments matter in Boxing, & Mr. E calls that, "Nonsense."

BarryWashington wrote:Both Mr. E and John L. have solid points, however; I have to side with Mr. E on the fact that this is a hypothetical who-beats-who peak-for-peak tournament. A lot of boxers from the '30's-60's tallied up more accomplishments/experience than Ike, but; peak-for-peak Ike would have a lot of them unconscious.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:My favourite part was when John L. pointed out experience & accomplishments matter in Boxing, & Mr. E calls that, "Nonsense."

BarryWashington wrote:Both Mr. E and John L. have solid points, however; I have to side with Mr. E on the fact that this is a hypothetical who-beats-who peak-for-peak tournament. A lot of boxers from the '30's-60's tallied up more accomplishments/experience than Ike, but; peak-for-peak Ike would have a lot of them unconscious.

The Great John L wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Mr E wrote:I don't know why these kinds of discussions always need to become hostile on this board but c'est la vie. To respond.

This is boxing, not track and field.

Brilliant. Good thing you pointed that out.

We're talking experience and accomplishments, which is what matters in boxing.

Nonsense. We were discussing a hypothetical boxing tournament, in which what matters is who would have beaten whom. Many things "matter in boxing," depending on the context of the discussion.

Watch a prime Quarry, like the Spencer fight and tell me that Ike was as fast as Quarry.

As between Quarry and Ike, I wouldn't want to live on the difference, that's for sure. Quarry was no speed-demon, your evident wide-eyed fan worship notwithstanding. And I do think Ike was probably faster than Lyle and Shavers were.

TI couldn't agree more. Tua and Byrd were both very good HWs, probably two of the better HWs of the late 90's, behind Lewis. Maybe if Ike had continued beating good HWs he could be mentioned as a guy that would have stood a chance against the names you throw around so cavalierly.

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't believe for one minute you would bet a month's mortgage on any of these guys to beat Ike Ibeabuchi if this were more than mere fantasy and somebody gave you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.

"Especially" Shavers? I guess KOing Ellis, Young, Bugner, Norton, Smith and Williams, among others, doesn't compare well to Tua and Byrd?

That's an inane comment. He also lost to Ron Stander, Bob Stallings, didn't make it a single round against Quarry, collapsed against Tex Cobb and Bernardo Mercado, etc. Point is, Shavers was a thunderous puncher, with some skill, limited speed and limited durability. And, yes, I'd put a lot of money on Ibeabuchi to hand him his head. Less so with Lyle, who was better than Shavers, but I'd still make Ike the favorite.

Nobody is saying that Ike may not have developed into a top HW, but a close win over Tua and a stoppage of Byrd doesn't compare favorably to fighting top HWs for a decade, during what was arguably the best HW era, which is exactly what Quarry, Lyle and Shavers did. Some of us just like to see accomplishments, rather than possibilities.

The question is not where they rate in terms of historical significance or whatever sort of romantic notion you may have of overall 'worth.' The question is do you really think Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle could have beaten Ike Ibeabuchi in a fight? For cryin' out loud, he was 235-240 (I forget exactly) in shape and he had some real skills. You would seriously take 210 pound Earnie Shavers, who got knocked out a dozen times in his career, to "stomp" him, as in the fight would be no contest??????

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Here is an interesting statistic, Shavers had two more first round knock outs than Ibeabuchi had fights. With those including Norton, Ellis & carter it is quite fair to say that Earnie had a better resume of first rd victories than Ike did overall.

The Great John L wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:My favourite part was when John L. pointed out experience & accomplishments matter in Boxing, & Mr. E calls that, "Nonsense."

Yes I guess all he has to do is find a big strong guy on the street and that guy could beat prime Quarry, Lyle and Shavers as well. I wonder why boxers even bother fighting more than once or twice in their lives?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"Glad you had a favorite part Irene. I repeat, many things matter in boxing depending on the context. Feel free to refute." - Mr E.

How's that Ignore function working for you?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

BarryWashington wrote:Both Mr. E and John L. have solid points, however; I have to side with Mr. E on the fact that this is a hypothetical who-beats-who peak-for-peak tournament. A lot of boxers from the '30's-60's tallied up more accomplishments/experience than Ike, but; peak-for-peak Ike would have a lot of them unconscious.

Mr E wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

What are you talking about? Ibeabuchi had 25-30 pounds on Shavers.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

Here is an interesting statistic, Shavers had two more first round knock outs than Ibeabuchi had fights. With those including Norton, Ellis & carter it is quite fair to say that Earnie had a better resume of first rd victories than Ike did overall.

Mr E wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Mr E wrote:I don't know why these kinds of discussions always need to become hostile on this board but c'est la vie. To respond.
Brilliant. Good thing you pointed that out.
Nonsense. We were discussing a hypothetical boxing tournament, in which what matters is who would have beaten whom. Many things "matter in boxing," depending on the context of the discussion.
As between Quarry and Ike, I wouldn't want to live on the difference, that's for sure. Quarry was no speed-demon, your evident wide-eyed fan worship notwithstanding. And I do think Ike was probably faster than Lyle and Shavers were.

I don't know what to say to this except that I don't believe for one minute you would bet a month's mortgage on any of these guys to beat Ike Ibeabuchi if this were more than mere fantasy and somebody gave you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is.
That's an inane comment. He also lost to Ron Stander, Bob Stallings, didn't make it a single round against Quarry, collapsed against Tex Cobb and Bernardo Mercado, etc. Point is, Shavers was a thunderous puncher, with some skill, limited speed and limited durability. And, yes, I'd put a lot of money on Ibeabuchi to hand him his head. Less so with Lyle, who was better than Shavers, but I'd still make Ike the favorite.
The question is not where they rate in terms of historical significance or whatever sort of romantic notion you may have of overall 'worth.' The question is do you really think Earnie Shavers or Ron Lyle could have beaten Ike Ibeabuchi in a fight? For cryin' out loud, he was 235-240 (I forget exactly) in shape and he had some real skills. You would seriously take 210 pound Earnie Shavers, who got knocked out a dozen times in his career, to "stomp" him, as in the fight would be no contest??????

What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

That's a fair question. Ike was bigger, stronger, and far more durable than Shavers was, so I like his chances in a big way. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing. What surprised me was the dismissive, arrogant tone of 'Shavers would stomp him,' etc.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Mr E wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Ibeabuchi was, "bigger" than Shavers? If so, it surely could not have been by any measure actually impacting the fight.

Pretty sure we wouldn't be talking about Foreman on Marciano, here.

What are you talking about? Ibeabuchi had 25-30 pounds on Shavers.

You think Ibeabuchi would have that in the 70's? Think Shavers wouldn't in the 90's? What is the realistic, actual genetic difference between them? It can't be much.

The Great John L wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

C'mon. I think he explained it quite well. Ike was bigger and stronger, and Shavers lost some fights. I guess Shavers should have had a lot less fights, and then he wouldn't have lost so many of those 89 pro fights that don't really matter.

Why would a fighter bother to have so many fights? We all now know that experience and beating a lot of guys doesn't matter.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Mr E wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
What makes you so sure of Ike over shavers? Earnie almost knocked out Ali & Holmes, he could turn out Ike's lights in the blink of an eye.

That's a fair question. Ike was bigger, stronger, and far more durable than Shavers was, so I like his chances in a big way. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing. What surprised me was the dismissive, arrogant tone of 'Shavers would stomp him,' etc.

I would disagree that Ike was stronger and while he appeared to be durable that is difficult to gauge after only 20 fights. Remember how everyone raved about Sam Peter's chin? After some fights against better fighters in a terribly weak division that was proven to be words that were spoken too soon.

I wouldn't rule out Ike beating Earnie, but you seem to be equally as dismissive of Shavers chances as others are of Ike's. Earnie would go all out for the kill and burn himself out but he was always dangerous and had a heart as big as his punch. He stopped Roy Williams running on gas fumes and on the verge of being stopped himself. He really didn't gas hard against Ali until the latter stages of a 15 round fight. How would Ike handle being hurt?

I think this is a tough fight to call but Shavers was better than you're giving him credit for. I'll tell you one thing, I would go past a mortgage payment, I would bet my house on Shavers against Wlad.