Finest fighter of the 80s?

The Contenders:

Larry Holmes: Dominated the Heavyweights for five years, and showed great heart in winning battles, when he was slightly passed his best (Williams, Snipes and Whitherspoon). Unlucky to drop the title at 48-0

Mike Tyson: Took over from Larry, finally winning the title in 88, but by which time, he had already all but cleaned the division up. Beat virtually everyone that mattered (Tucker, Thomas, Biggs, Holmes and Spinks).

Michael Spinks: Still the only reigning Light Heavyweight Champion, to win THE Heavyweight Championship. Although best remembered for his Heavyweight reign (Beating Holmes (twice) and Cooney), Spinks was a finer Light Heavyweight, a division he never lost in, and beat the likes of Qawi, Muhammad and Johnson.

Marvin Hagler: Reigned for nearly seven years as THE Middleweight Champion, beating the likes of Hearns, Duran and Leona… ;D Mugabi.

Thomas Hearns: A thrilling fighter, who won alphabet titles at every weight from Welterweight though to Light Heavyweight in the 80s, beating the likes of Benetiz, Duran and Cuevas on the way.

Ray Leonard: Split a coupe of fights with Duran in 1980,but not lose again in the decade. Beat Hearns in a thrilling contest to unify the Welterweight Championship, before coming back from a three year break to beat long reigning Middleweight King Hagler, before beating the bigger Lalonde, drawing in a rematch with Hearns ::), and finishing the decade off, by winning a deciding Duran bout.

Khaosai Galaxy: Post 1981, Galaxy was virtually unbeatable as an 115lber. He won the WBA crown in late 84, beat IBF champ Pical in 85, and remained unbeaten for the rest of the decade. The man is virtually a god in Thailand.

Myung Woo Yuh: Hardly a puncher, his record once stood at 13-0 (0), but probably the finest fighter to ever come out Korea, beat a who’s who of the Junior Flyweight divisions, in the mid/late 80s; finishing the decade unbeaten in 32 fights. That good, the hot American and Mexican fighters Carbajal and Gonzales, both choose not to fight him…

I chose Leonard because he beat legendary fighters, Holmes and Marvin are a close 2nd and 3rd in no order.

I was split between Tyson and Leonard, my two fave fighters of all time. I voted Leonard for the heart and fights the man took and won.

i chose hagler. for seven years the ONLY middleweight champion

Pat Benetar...you could hit her with your best shot and she wouldn't waiver!

tyson...

Like him or not you have to go with Ray Leonard...He fought every top fighter there was....Hagler, Duran, Hearns, Lalonde, Benetiez, Camacho, Norris, And if he fought Norris and Camacho earlier in his career he would have destroyed them

Holmes for the first half of the 1980s. Split over the last half between Hagler and Tyson. Halger beat Hearns in 85 and Mugabi in 86, and then when he lost the middleweight title Tyson came along and controlled the decade from 1987-89.

I would say Tyson, and Leonard... Also Britkid I notice you say Tyson finally won the title in 88... Well I know exactly why you say that but it's BS, he won it in 86.. You can't say Spinks held the title for 3 years without fighting anyone it doesn't make sense... He had all but retired after beating Holmes, it's nothing to do with Tyson that the linear champ wasn't actively fighting. THat's like saying to become HW champ today Lennox lewis would need to come out of retirement and lose.. IT's actually exactly like saying that and doesn't make any sense imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

I would say Tyson, and Leonard... Also Britkid I notice you say Tyson finally won the title in 88... Well I know exactly why you say that but it's BS, he won it in 86.. You can't say Spinks held the title for 3 years without fighting anyone it doesn't make sense... He had all but retired after beating Holmes, it's nothing to do with Tyson that the linear champ wasn't actively fighting. THat's like saying to become HW champ today Lennox lewis would need to come out of retirement and lose.. IT's actually exactly like saying that and doesn't make any sense imo.

---

Mike Tyson did not become Champion until June 27 1988; was he the best Heavyweight in the world in November 1986? With hindsight yes, but being the best fighter in the division, does not always mean you are World Champion.

Micheal Spinks, was as active as a lot of former Heavyweight Champions, in his three year reign. He made three successful defence of his Championship, and possibly would of had more in that time, if it were not for that knee injury.

You cannot manipulate history to suit, it is not that easy.

As for the Lennox example, well a precedent has been set, with Ali's 67 retirement. Frazier beat Ellis in early 1970, to win the vacant Championship, Ali choose to comeback, but because like Lewis, he had announced his retirement, he had to comeback and challenge Champion Frazier.

If Lennox does comeback, and there is no champ, again, a precedent has been set, with another Ali comeback in 1980. Because there was no unified Champion at the time, Ali stepped into the ring against Holmes as Champion; IMO ;)

Yes but my point was that Michael Spinks never wanted any part of Tyson, he later admitted this.. So how can you hold it against Mike for not having the oppourtunity to fight for the world title earlier.. Also, you could also say along the same lines you just have, that he became champ in 87 when he beat Larry Holmes then, since Holmes regained his title beating Spinks in the rematch.. Right? ;)

Also Mike Tyson is listed in the history books as becoming the youngest world champion ever, so I guess it counts in most people eyes. By your thoughts he wouldn't be the youngest ever then? .. I think Patterson would have won it around the same age if you are saying Tyson wasn't champ until 88.

I have stated many times, that IMO, Tyson is the second youngest World Heavyweight Champ, behind Patterson, by a month or so; and that he is the second youngest Heavyweight titlist, behind me ;)

As for Tyson being avoided. Well you may be right, but a lot of it was to do with the Dynamic Duo (King and Lewis) splitting up, at a crucial time. That may indeed been in part, because Spinks did not want to fight Tyson.

But again, that does not really matter; Dempsey was never stripped for not fighting his virtually universally recognised #1 contender Harry Wills, in his seven year reign....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

I have stated many times, that IMO, Tyson is the second youngest World Heavyweight Champ, behind Patterson, by a month or so; and that he is the second youngest Heavyweight titlist, behind me ;)

As for Tyson being avoided. Well you may be right, but a lot of it was to do with the Dynamic Duo (King and Lewis) splitting up, at a crucial time. That may indeed been in part, because Spinks did not want to fight Tyson.

But again, that does not really matter; Dempsey was never stripped for not fighting his virtually universally recognised #1 contender Harry Wills, in his seven year reign....

---

Did you fight then really Britkid? What title did you win?

haglar,tyson,holmes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Pat Benetar...you could hit her with your best shot and she wouldn't waiver!

---

hahaha COOL CLICK LYLE for the cheezy totally 80's joke of the week!!!!

its sad im the only one who got that. either we have some slow peeps on here or some youngins.