BoxRec

I recently watched, for the first time, the WBA Heavyweight Championship fights of the late 70s and 80s.
While there is much not to like about this era, and, at least until 1984, there really isn’t much reason to go outside of the Ali-Holmes-Spinks-Tyson timeline for purposes of legitimacy, I liked and learned a lot from the experience.

In addition to now being a big fan of Big John Tate, I have a better appreciation of Mike Weaver.
Maybe it’s his size and physique more than his actual fighting style, but Weaver reminds me a lot Holyfield.
Weaver seems to always be in shape and ready to give a tough fight and always be dedicated to his training.
Without Holyfield’s Olympic pedigree, but a military background instead, you can see how he had to learn on the job. I really don’t hold his early losses against him.
Like Holy, he fought very well throughout his 30s and had a great chin.
My main question with him is why his title reign had so little action.

After beating Tate, he has a good defense with Coetzee in the second part of that year.

He then takes off an entire year before fighting his number 1 challenger James Tillis in what truly was a dud of a fight (not Weaver’s fault).

He then waits another full year before Dokes (which really was a bad stoppage).

Was Weaver waiting for a rematch with Holmes during this period, not wishing to jeopardize it by fighting?

Was his inactivity somehow because of Don King?

Weaver seems, to me, more of a 70s guy who seems to have a good head on his shoulders, unlike some of the younger guys of the era that were completely controlled by King.

Was Weaver, for lack of a better term, kind of a frozen champ?

He just seems to be too good and have too much of a warrior’s mentality to just fight twice in two and a half years.

I remember there was some talk of Mike Weaver defending his title against Gerry Cooney
but the WBA belt organization demanded he fight James Tillis instead OR BE STRIPPED OF HIS TITLE,
even tho Cooney was ranked number 1,
and Tillis number 2 at that time.
Cooney's promters offered Tillis ONE MILLION DOLLARS to step aside and let Cooney fight Weaver.

Weaver was signed to fight Cooney, but Cooney pulled out for more money with Holmes.

Fascinating tidbits on Weaver; he lost not only to Duane, but to Rodney Bobick as well ! He improved markedly exemplified by his fights with Stan Ward.

Weaver was a well built KO artist who got better and gave the champion Holmes all he could handle.

I've thought this before: Mike Weaver was the true Rocky, not Wepner, not Frazier, not Cooney.

Also there was pressure from Jess Jackson and PUSH for Mike Weaver not to go
to South Africa and fight Gerry Cooney.

The original scheduled date for Mike Weaver vrs James Tillis was February.28.1981 in Las Vegas,
but Weaver hurt his hand in training (ligament tear),so fight was postponed until October 1981.

Mike Weaver was also scheduled to defend the WBO title against Tex Cobb on June.2.1982,
but Mike Weaver injured his shoulder in trainingg and fight postponed then cancelled
when a group of thugs (some 25-30)attacked Tex Cobb in a Philadelphia bar room and broke his arm with a tire-iron or a baseball bat
(or maybe with both).

Caractacus wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 17:15 I remember there was some talk of Mike Weaver defending his title against Gerry Cooney
but the WBA belt organization demanded he fight James Tillis instead OR BE STRIPPED OF HIS TITLE,
even tho Cooney was ranked number 1,
and Tillis number 2 at that time.
Cooney's promters offered Tillis ONE MILLION DOLLARS to step aside and let Cooney fight Weaver.

Man, that’s interesting. Was Tillis promoted by King at this time? That’s the only reason I can think a number 1 would be skipped for a number 2. That and King knew Holmes v Cooney would be a much bigger gate, considering Holmes was much more recognized.

I am also surprised Quick didn’t take the money, he didn’t really show up for the Weaver fight in my opinion.

Angelo Dundee sounded furious with him.

Thanks for the dates considering proposed fights. I can see how a ligament injury would set things back, also that beat down on Cobb is nuts. That he was out fighting not too long after getting into with 20 some guys is further proof how tough that guy was.

So, with less injury and less wba strangeness
Weaver could have had:
Coetzee in late 1980.
Tillis in early 1981
Maybe Cooney/and or Cobb in fall 1981
Or Spring 1982.

If the fight with Dokes isn’t stopped, it’s conceivable that it turns into a draw like the rematch did. Draw favoring weaver this time.

Tony1244 wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 17:30 Weaver was a well built KO artist who got better and gave the champion Holmes all he could handle.

I've thought this before: Mike Weaver was the true Rocky, not Wepner, not Frazier, not Cooney.

Did Cooney pull out or was it that King knew Holmes v Cooney would make more money?
It sounds like Cooney’s people wanted the weaver fight.

Weaver does have that Rocky feel to him, Tony. I think you’re right about that!

Contendeh wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 19:22

Tony1244 wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 17:30 Weaver was a well built KO artist who got better and gave the champion Holmes all he could handle.

I've thought this before: Mike Weaver was the true Rocky, not Wepner, not Frazier, not Cooney.

Did Cooney pull out or was it that King knew Holmes v Cooney would make more money?
It sounds like Cooney’s people wanted the weaver fight.

Weaver does have that Rocky feel to him, Tony. I think you’re right about that!

From what i remember without looking anything up, and I could be off is that Cooney's people simply wanted the bigger paycheck against Holmes. As I said either my memory or the story could be wrong. If Cooney had lost to Weaver, which he could have, then Rappaport and Jones did the right thing.

Not to talk too much about Gerry, but I have always disliked that they put him in with Holmes without him ever going past 8 rounds.

I mean, the Tyson camp was smart enough to put him in with Tillis, speaking of Tillis, knowing he’d go ten with Tyson.

He wouldn’t have to be some great threat, just a strong trial horse.

Tillis fought Tyson better than he fought Hercules, in my opinion, and it was 5 years later.

Contendeh wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 19:05

Caractacus wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 17:15 I remember there was some talk of Mike Weaver defending his title against Gerry Cooney
but the WBA belt organization demanded he fight James Tillis instead OR BE STRIPPED OF HIS TITLE,
even tho Cooney was ranked number 1,
and Tillis number 2 at that time.
Cooney's promters offered Tillis ONE MILLION DOLLARS to step aside and let Cooney fight Weaver.

Man, that’s interesting. Was Tillis promoted by King at this time? That’s the only reason I can think a number 1 would be skipped for a number 2. That and King knew Holmes v Cooney would be a much bigger gate, considering Holmes was much more recognized.

I am also surprised Quick didn’t take the money, he didn’t really show up for the Weaver fight in my opinion.

Angelo Dundee sounded furious with him.

Thanks for the dates considering proposed fights. I can see how a ligament injury would set things back, also that beat down on Cobb is nuts. That he was out fighting not too long after getting into with 20 some guys is further proof how tough that guy was.

So, with less injury and less wba strangeness
Weaver could have had:
Coetzee in late 1980.
Tillis in early 1981
Maybe Cooney/and or Cobb in fall 1981
Or Spring 1982.

If the fight with Dokes isn’t stopped, it’s conceivable that it turns into a draw like the rematch did. Draw favoring weaver this time.

If Mike had gotten by Cobb, he would've had Page to deal with, in the perfect scenario. But GregI f***ed that up by going with King.

Contendeh wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 21:39 Not to talk too much about Gerry, but I have always disliked that they put him in with Holmes without him ever going past 8 rounds.

I mean, the Tyson camp was smart enough to put him in with Tillis, speaking of Tillis, knowing he’d go ten with Tyson

There's no magic number of rounds you need to go before you fight the best.

The 2 most important things are your endurance/stamina and where your boxing mastery is at... Can you go 15 rounds in the gym with like 8 top sparring partners? .... If you suffer a patch of fatigue (everybody does) do you have the defensive skills to box through it instead of run or lay on the ropes? .... You have to go on defense during sparring to figure this out...

If you go super hard on offense trying like Hell to get somebody out and it doesn't happen? You'll be tired for a patch and your opponent WILL look to get you KTFO then and there... The adrenaline isn't flowing in a sparring match the way it does in a fight - so therefore your defense is going to come into play more in a fight, possibly for an entire round or 2 - because if you were certain your foe was about to be battered unconscious and he was not - you need get him out later.

Joshua had never been past 7 rounds when he faced Klitschko... The feeling with many "experts" is that he'd be a sitting duck in the Championship rounds if it went that far cuz he was 250... Klitschko was already fading by the 11th... AJ stayed on top of him with hard combinations, leaving him no respite.. Wlad was going out period, whether the referee jumped in or not.. He was down 3 X and barely surviving the vicious assaults.. It was a real good stoppage.

Kalan,
I think you’re on the money here with a lot of this.
I think what, maybe, we’re both on here about is the same thing...and it all comes back to mike weaver!

What I picked up on is that, after watching all these fights, one of the things that conncected with me, was Weaver had a good, solid mentality. He was a fighter.
He came back after the Holmes fight stronger. Cooney lost his fight and he disappeared. He did this again after Spinks. Foreman was his first fight back, meanwhile George had been fighting a good many fights before Cooney. Mentality.

Fighters should love to fight. Fight often.

No magic amount of rounds, like you say, but I question why, as managers, they didn’t have Cooney work in a longer fight. It wouldn’t have hurt him.

If Ike Ibeabuchi could fight Mo Wilson...

Man, everybody fought Wilson. What a chin. You give Wilson a punch and that guy owns the decade. Which brings me to Mercer. I think Mercer lost to Wilson. Which brings us to Ferguson, who was a sparring partner who seemed always ready to fight.
Which brings me to Weaver. I just didn’t get why he didn’t do more.

Some unfortunate delaying injuries as the other person was good enough to point out.

I think Joshua likes to fight, one of the things I like about him.
If I were fighting him, if I were Parker, I would like to extend him rounds, though. I would do what I could to make him tired. I don’t know if it would work, it’s a question, but if it didn’t, it would only raise my opinion of him.

After winning the WBA title with that dramatic 15th round KO of John Tate, Weaver was all but set to fight a comebacking Muhammad Ali in the summer of 1980.

At first Ali was intent of fighting Holmes but changed his mind and declared that he would win the title a 4th time by whipping "that Marine, Weaver the Beaver."

Reportedly, Bob Arum, who promoted Weaver, made some last minute financial demands on Ali the night before the fight was to be officially announced.

Ali balked, refused the fight, and quickly shifted his focus back to Holmes, costing Weaver the payday of his life.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Jan 2018, 19:18Ali balked, refused the fight, and quickly shifted his focus back to Holmes, costing Weaver the payday of his life.

I always thought Weaver would have beaten Ali even worse than Holmes had that fight happened.

Weaver was more of a plodder than Holmes.

He probably would have outworked the depleted Ali, like Berbick did in 1981, but he wouldn't have caught him with as many clean shots as Holmes did.

And Weaver was not really a consistent fighter. He looked like a million dollars in some fights, and other times he seemed to be an ordinary heavyweight.

Tate had won almost every round against him before Weaver mounted that knockout for the ages.

It cost him a payday for sure, but beating Ali in 1980 is nothing but a sad experience, no matter who does it.
It’s a non win.

I got Tate winning 10 rounds in the weaver fight. I attribute that to Tate’s skill, not any kind of inconsistency on Weaver’s part.

Contendeh wrote: ↑14 Jan 2018, 21:49 I got Tate winning 10 rounds in the weaver fight. I attribute that to Tate’s skill, not any kind of inconsistency on Weaver’s part.

That's correct... Even though Weaver was actually doing more damage -- and Tate had a big lead to protect.

That fight was like a football game where one team racks up twice as many yards on the field, but somehow manages to lose the game.... When the other team finally got their asses into the red zone on far fewer occasions -- their killer instinct ignited and they drove the ball right down their throats and across the goal line.

John Madden once said of the famous 'Prevent Defense' .... "It prevents winning."

Funny, I had Tate winning 12-2 going into the final round, but he was a bit shaky also.

Nile4000 wrote: ↑15 Jan 2018, 00:53 Funny, I had Tate winning 12-2 going into the final round, but he was a bit shaky also.

Kalan wrote: ↑14 Jan 2018, 23:40

Contendeh wrote: ↑14 Jan 2018, 21:49 I got Tate winning 10 rounds in the weaver fight. I attribute that to Tate’s skill, not any kind of inconsistency on Weaver’s part.

That's correct... Even though Weaver was actually doing more damage -- and Tate had a big lead to protect.

That fight was like a football game where one team racks up twice as many yards on the field, but somehow manages to lose the game.... When the other team finally got their asses into the red zone on far fewer occasions -- their killer instinct ignited and they drove the ball right down their throats and across the goal line.

John Madden once said of the famous 'Prevent Defense' .... "It prevents winning."

We seem to be having two almost corresponding conversations, enjoyable ones, in two different threads.

Maybe having a hometown fight just a few months after winning the championship is not such a good idea. Maybe, if you are going to do such things, maybe you don’t choose Mike Weaver at his perhaps best, a guy we both seem to think is more than a bit overlooked, too, as your victory lap.

Maybe you don’t call your fighter “Big” when he really is a very smart boxer puncher. Big for foreman, maybe not your guy.

If you do this, and your fighter loses, you don’t match him up with the dirtiest, most mauling guy around less than 90 days later in the same city you lost the gold medal in. So he can punch you in the back of the head.

For weaver, tate was fighting well throughout the entire fight. 10 rounds up, 12 rounds up. What have you.

He had footspeed and lateral movement that put both Lewis and Bowe to shame. Like Lewis, when he fought as a tall guy, he looked very, very good.

What he should of done while in Montreal before the Berbick fight, is instead of fighting,
would be to go into Duran’s dressing room and asked Arcel how much he wanted to train him, or Leonard’s room to see Angelo Dundee and ask him the same question.

Maybe if he had won the gold medal in that city four years earlier, instead of drawing Teófilo, he wouldn’t have had to.

Contendeh wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 19:22

Tony1244 wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 17:30 Weaver was a well built KO artist who got better and gave the champion Holmes all he could handle.

I've thought this before: Mike Weaver was the true Rocky, not Wepner, not Frazier, not Cooney.

Did Cooney pull out or was it that King knew Holmes v Cooney would make more money?
It sounds like Cooney’s people wanted the weaver fight.

Weaver does have that Rocky feel to him, Tony. I think you’re right about that!

Mike Weaver wanted the Cooney fight because it was a 2 million dollar payday,
instead of about 250 K he got for fighting Tillis.
but they threatened to strip Weaver of his title if he didn't fight Tillis next.

I don't recall my actual scorecard but I imagine I had Tate winning 11 or 12 of the first 14 rounds.

Weaver seemed unable to get off.

It was obvious, however, that Tate suddenly gassed in the 14th.

Probably a combination of Weaver's physical strength and body punching along with some suspect cardio on the part of Tate.

It was a KO that Tate never seemed to recover from.

He was stopped in similar fashion by Berbick in his very next bout.

After that, Tate spent the remainder of his career carefully avoiding name heavyweights. Instead making a living feasting on safe journeyman.

Contendeh wrote: ↑13 Jan 2018, 13:47 I recently watched, for the first time, the WBA Heavyweight Championship fights of the late 70s and 80s.
While there is much not to like about this era, and, at least until 1984, there really isn’t much reason to go outside of the Ali-Holmes-Spinks-Tyson timeline for purposes of legitimacy, I liked and learned a lot from the experience.

In addition to now being a big fan of Big John Tate, I have a better appreciation of Mike Weaver.
Maybe it’s his size and physique more than his actual fighting style, but Weaver reminds me a lot Holyfield.
Weaver seems to always be in shape and ready to give a tough fight and always be dedicated to his training.
Without Holyfield’s Olympic pedigree, but a military background instead, you can see how he had to learn on the job. I really don’t hold his early losses against him.
Like Holy, he fought very well throughout his 30s and had a great chin.
My main question with him is why his title reign had so little action.

After beating Tate, he has a good defense with Coetzee in the second part of that year.

He then takes off an entire year before fighting his number 1 challenger James Tillis in what truly was a dud of a fight (not Weaver’s fault).

He then waits another full year before Dokes (which really was a bad stoppage).

Was Weaver waiting for a rematch with Holmes during this period, not wishing to jeopardize it by fighting?

Was his inactivity somehow because of Don King?

Weaver seems, to me, more of a 70s guy who seems to have a good head on his shoulders, unlike some of the younger guys of the era that were completely controlled by King.

Was Weaver, for lack of a better term, kind of a frozen champ?

He just seems to be too good and have too much of a warrior’s mentality to just fight twice in two and a half years.

He would occasionally be called "Once a Year Weaver"
As others have mentioned, there were various reasons for him not defending the title more frequently. For once, it wasn't all Don King's fault.
Always thought Weaver was a class act. He even admitted that Larry Holmes was the real champion when they were both "champions' at the same time.

Mike was a terrible talker on TV... That's 1 reason he didn't get the massive fan pull that his ability deserved... In the gym he was a very cordial, friendly and articulate guy... When he was interviewed on TV he froze up and turned into Leon Spinks.

George Foreman became a brilliant interviewee... The best I've ever seen... He made a fan of everyone listening.

I remember watching the John Tate vrs Mike Weaver fight live on TV as if it were yesterday..
It was part of a special live ABC boxing show that was shown on a weekday evening.
The fight was in its last round and i figured it was going to go to the scorecards
with John Tate the clear winner.
I was about to get up off the couch to go to the refridgerator and get a sandwich and snacks getting ready to watch
the fight that was coming after it, when BLAMO !
John Tate looked like he was suddenly struck by a lighting bolt in the ring and pitched face forward
to the canvas.