Foreman's record has already been broken overall. Not at Heavyweight though.
True enough(no lineal thou), who was she now again?
HE was Bernard Hopkins, and yes he broke his own record for the Lineal title as well as his own record with just a World Title that wasn't considered lineal later.
True enough(no lineal thou), who was she now again?
HE was Bernard Hopkins, and yes he broke his own record for the Lineal title as well as his own record with just a World Title that wasn't considered lineal later.
Oh yeah. I forgotten about that... 46 right against Pascal and again 48 when he got a paper strap? I did edit this a bunch of times and fact checked myself twice
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 13 Jun 2020, 14:08
by Jeff_lacy_ko
Boxing overall was better in the 90s. Its not that fighters were necessarily better but the upper echelon fought each other more frequently
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 13 Jun 2020, 14:44
by saad1000
Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑13 Jun 2020, 14:08
Boxing overall was better in the 90s. Its not that fighters were necessarily better but the upper echelon fought each other more frequently
I don't think they really did. Most of the 90's was people arguing over who was ducking who. You had a heavyweight championship fight ended for a holding DQ. You had a guy cry in the ring in a heavyweight title fight and not throw a punch. Yes, some big fights were made. But they are being made now, too.
Living through the 90's, everyone bitched about exactly the same stuff they bitch about now.
Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑13 Jun 2020, 14:08
Boxing overall was better in the 90s. Its not that fighters were necessarily better but the upper echelon fought each other more frequently
I don't think they really did. Most of the 90's was people arguing over who was ducking who. You had a heavyweight championship fight ended for a holding DQ. You had a guy cry in the ring in a heavyweight title fight and not throw a punch. Yes, some big fights were made. But they are being made now, too.
Living through the 90's, everyone bitched about exactly the same stuff they bitch about now.
What was the Championship fight that ended in a holding DQ in the 90's?
saad1000 wrote: ↑13 Jun 2020, 14:44
I don't think they really did. Most of the 90's was people arguing over who was ducking who. You had a heavyweight championship fight ended for a holding DQ. You had a guy cry in the ring in a heavyweight title fight and not throw a punch. Yes, some big fights were made. But they are being made now, too.
Living through the 90's, everyone bitched about exactly the same stuff they bitch about now.
What was the Championship fight that ended in a holding DQ in the 90's?
What was the Championship fight that ended in a holding DQ in the 90's?
Lennox Lewis-Henry Akinwande
Damn didn't know that.
No wonder Akinwande doesn't get talked about much.
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 13 Jun 2020, 16:20
by punchoutsb
There are always fun fights and big fights to be made since it is all relative to the talent available.
In terms of overall talent of the division it's pretty terrible right now, but that doesn't mean it can't be fun.
It's also worth noting that most people just like to whinge and dislike the era they are currently living through.
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 13 Jun 2020, 19:56
by Paci
Something that happend during that era was just wtf.
McCalls break down for one. Damn. Or other weirdness like Morrison fighting HIV-postive.... f*ck. Sick bastard when you think about it.
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 14 Jun 2020, 01:29
by gregregegg
There are fun fights to be made now, just depends if they happen, AJ probably has the best current resume, and compare that to holifeilds 90s notable fights
-Busta duglus
-george forman
-larry holmes
-Riddick bowe x2
-michael moore x2
-mike tyson x2
-lennox lewis x2
Imagine anyone building a decade like this in this era, Hope people start being willing to take 5050s and grow resumes cause looking back i respect a stackeddd holifeild 44-10 a lot more than a current wilder 43-1, or AJ 23-1 or fury 30-0.
But hopefuly they all start to step up and fight the best cause theres some quality to be made. UFC making losses ok again hopefuly washes onto boxing and 2020's can have all the top 5 round robins going nuts.
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 14 Jun 2020, 03:56
by DrDuke
Paci wrote: ↑13 Jun 2020, 19:56
Or other weirdness like Morrison fighting HIV-postive....
He actually wasn't fighting HIV-positive, he retired right after it had been discovered.
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 14 Jun 2020, 08:27
by Thomastearns
gregregegg wrote: ↑14 Jun 2020, 01:29
There are fun fights to be made now, just depends if they happen, AJ probably has the best current resume, and compare that to holifeilds 90s notable fights
-Busta duglus
-george forman
-larry holmes
-Riddick bowe x2
-michael moore x2
-mike tyson x2
-lennox lewis x2
Imagine anyone building a decade like this in this era, Hope people start being willing to take 5050s and grow resumes cause looking back i respect a stackeddd holifeild 44-10 a lot more than a current wilder 43-1, or AJ 23-1 or fury 30-0.
But hopefuly they all start to step up and fight the best cause theres some quality to be made. UFC making losses ok again hopefuly washes onto boxing and 2020's can have all the top 5 round robins going nuts.
At the end of the day it comes down to an economic transaction. They want our money we want the big fights but they won't give them to us but still want our money.
They need to understand they got competition now they never had. It was their stupid greedy attitude that fed the rise of firstly WWF and then later UFC. People got bored with boxing and all it's drug cheats and corrupt decisions etc.
For sure there's more money knocking around now, the western world is spilling over with money, at least for now, but doesn't mean they're going to always get it off us so easily in the future.
I'm glad Anthony Joshua is the biggest star as he clearly has the best resume to date, and the fans know it.
Im going with the worse case scenario when it comes to Morrison.
I don't understand this. There's absolutely no proof Morrison had HIV in '89, and no need to call him a sick b*astard for intentionally fighting with it. Why on earth would you go with the worse case scenario when it's clearly something someone just made up?
Im going with the worse case scenario when it comes to Morrison.
I don't understand this. There's absolutely no proof Morrison had HIV in '89, and no need to call him a sick b*astard for intentionally fighting with it. Why on earth would you go with the worse case scenario when it's clearly something someone just made up?
Im cynical as f*ck and I try to keep it real. So much BS around this and contradiction all over the place around it all.
Edit
I Googled this when I lurked around. And yeah, sorry to however is his fans. But yeah...
I don't understand this. There's absolutely no proof Morrison had HIV in '89, and no need to call him a sick b*astard for intentionally fighting with it. Why on earth would you go with the worse case scenario when it's clearly something someone just made up?
Im cynical as f*ck and I try to keep it real. So much BS around this and contradiction all over the place around it all.
Edit
I Googled this when I lurked around. And yeah, sorry to however is his fans. But yeah...
So yeah? Lets leave it here.
I stand corrected as feck I've never seen this before.
Is all the supposed "proof" he never had HIV at all bs in your opinion then?
I don't claim to be an HIV expert, but wouldn't Kenzie have been born with HIV if Tommy had been positive back then? I personally believe Tommy had HIV, but he was also a pathological liar and meth can definitely eat away at your body before killing you early. I've also known people personally who came up with some crazy lies to cover their meth use. I never understood the negative tests that followed, unless all of those samples were not Tommy's blood.
I don't claim to be an HIV expert, but wouldn't Kenzie have been born with HIV if Tommy had been positive back then? I personally believe Tommy had HIV, but he was also a pathological liar and meth can definitely eat away at your body before killing you early. I've also known people personally who came up with some crazy lies to cover their meth use. I never understood the negative tests that followed, unless all of those samples were not Tommy's blood.
Or he paid a Doctor to claim it was negative.
For the record, I doubt he had it way back in 1989 because it would've been detected sooner if he had, but he may have contracted it before he tested positive.
Wouldn't have been too long though. It shows up on the test pretty quickly as I understand it.
Re: Better era of Heavyweight Boxing
Posted: 14 Jun 2020, 13:11
by Paci
Who knows. He f*ck'd up big and didn't care if he spread it to others also covering it up makes everything crazier and worse. Sick bastard.
I don't claim to be an HIV expert, but wouldn't Kenzie have been born with HIV if Tommy had been positive back then? I personally believe Tommy had HIV, but he was also a pathological liar and meth can definitely eat away at your body before killing you early. I've also known people personally who came up with some crazy lies to cover their meth use. I never understood the negative tests that followed, unless all of those samples were not Tommy's blood.
I've never seen this before.