Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 15 of 54

Thread: 28 years ago today...

Share/Bookmark

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Crawley, West Sussex
    Posts
    4,253
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1192
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    Quote Originally Posted by Beanflicker View Post
    I wasn't around back then so wouldn't know, but it definitely is possible that he was ranked #1 over Sweet Pea because when he KTFO Spinks, Pernell was coming off a loss JLR a few short months before. It was a bullshit decision, but still technically a "loss", so Sweet Pea couldn't have been #1 at the time Tyson beat Spinks.

    My point was 'The Ring' did not rank fighters pound for pound before 1995...

    In 1989, yeah Whitaker despite the Ramirez fix... I mean robbery (so sue me Senor Suleiman), was not pound for pound a contender for the #1 spot, but Chavez was. And some had the Kid from Culiacan ahead of Tyson, pound for pound.
    "Boxing is like jazz. The better it is, the less people appreciate it."

    George Foreman

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    This Lunatic Asylum
    Posts
    23,278
    Mentioned
    428 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3125
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    Quote Originally Posted by Britkid View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanflicker View Post
    I wasn't around back then so wouldn't know, but it definitely is possible that he was ranked #1 over Sweet Pea because when he KTFO Spinks, Pernell was coming off a loss JLR a few short months before. It was a bullshit decision, but still technically a "loss", so Sweet Pea couldn't have been #1 at the time Tyson beat Spinks.

    My point was 'The Ring' did not rank fighters pound for pound before 1995...

    In 1989, yeah Whitaker despite the Ramirez fix... I mean robbery (so sue me Senor Suleiman), was not pound for pound a contender for the #1 spot, but Chavez was. And some had the Kid from Culiacan ahead of Tyson, pound for pound.
    This says Tyson was Ring ranked P4P no.1

    The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings: 1989 - Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

    Is it a mistake?
    Last edited by Fenster; 03-08-2013 at 03:31 PM.
    3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,493
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1359
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    My point was 'The Ring' did not rank fighters pound for pound before 1995...

    In 1989, yeah Whitaker despite the Ramirez fix... I mean robbery (so sue me Senor Suleiman), was not pound for pound a contender for the #1 spot, but Chavez was. And some had the Kid from Culiacan ahead of Tyson, pound for pound.
    This says Tyson was Ring ranked P4P no.1

    The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings: 1989 - Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

    Is it a mistake?[/QUOTE]

    I think it's legit, I have a bunch of Ring magazines from pre-1995 (I'm at work right now so can't double check) that I'm 99.9% certain had p4p ratings.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,493
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1359
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    I think it's legit, I have a bunch of Ring magazines from pre-1995 (I'm at work right now so can't double check) that I'm 99.9% certain had p4p ratings.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    This Lunatic Asylum
    Posts
    23,278
    Mentioned
    428 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3125
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    Quote Originally Posted by Beanflicker View Post
    I think it's legit, I have a bunch of Ring magazines from pre-1995 (I'm at work right now so can't double check) that I'm 99.9% certain had p4p ratings.
    I'm pretty sure @Britkid has/had all those mags as well?

    I've used those ratings to bolster my argument about several topics, over the past few years, it'll be funny if they're actually incorrect ()
    Last edited by Fenster; 03-08-2013 at 04:31 PM.
    3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    On the levee
    Posts
    47,048
    Mentioned
    438 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    5122
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    95' was just the beginning of a "official" belt. Funny given how subjective and open to opinion p4p really is.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Guernsey, Channel Islands
    Posts
    8,719
    Mentioned
    208 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1396
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    Yeah it is just opinion but Mike Tyson at that time back then was seen as unbeatable. The other top fighters around would have all had percieved weaknesses or losses as skilled and consistent as they were they didnt have that aura of invincibility and destruction where it was possible to see Mike beating any fighter in history (at that point)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,586
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    982
    Cool Clicks

    Thumbs down Re: 28 years ago today...

    Britkid, despite all his smugness and self-assuredness is simply wrong in several of his would-be corrections. I remember Ring in '89 and Tyson was #1 Pound-for-Pound. The Great Julio Cesar Chavez was #2. Ring pound-for-pound began in 1995, my rosy red rectum!!!
    And I reiterate: nobody gave WBO any respect at all at the time. Effin' guy pullin' "WAA Heavyweight Champ" out of his @$$? For $#!t's sake!!!!


    And Michael Spinks? Insinuating I'm confused? I've never heard anything so disgusting, you owe me an appy-polly-loggy! His knees were so f*<ked going into the Tyson fight, he basically only went through the motions in training camp. Any serious fight-fan already knew he was finished. It was just hype and building up the gate to suggest Spinks had a chance. He had been stripped of that last title, but people still saw him as the lineal guy. His entire camp and Spinks himself knew he didn't have a prayer. Huge payday, and after the 1st knockdown, that man did go out on his shield by electing to come forward back into the lion's den rather than staying away. Respect to Michael Spinks.

    I'll admit to a little brain-damage, and my memory may be a bit f*<ked nowadays, and this stuff took place 28 years ago, but I remember this, and I can swallow it when I'm wrong. Some people just can't stand to be wrong. They'll go to great lengths obsessing, picking out every little detail eventually settling on spelling mistakes if there's nothing else to be had, trying to craft the perfect post, and when they make a flub (and more than one in this case), they just cannot stand to be wrong, so go back and edit! That's revisionism!



    britkid and the bradguy are just going to have to agree to disagree...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Crawley, West Sussex
    Posts
    4,253
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1192
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: 28 years ago today...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Britkid View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Beanflicker View Post
    I wasn't around back then so wouldn't know, but it definitely is possible that he was ranked #1 over Sweet Pea because when he KTFO Spinks, Pernell was coming off a loss JLR a few short months before. It was a bullshit decision, but still technically a "loss", so Sweet Pea couldn't have been #1 at the time Tyson beat Spinks.

    My point was 'The Ring' did not rank fighters pound for pound before 1995...

    In 1989, yeah Whitaker despite the Ramirez fix... I mean robbery (so sue me Senor Suleiman), was not pound for pound a contender for the #1 spot, but Chavez was. And some had the Kid from Culiacan ahead of Tyson, pound for pound.
    This says Tyson was Ring ranked P4P no.1

    The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings: 1989 - Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

    Is it a mistake?
    No. that is right, it was the first ratings after their comeback. The KO magazine did an annual poll to decide the best pound for pound fighters, but when The Ring became part of the KO/World Boxing/Boxing 87 et al group, they eventually took over the poll, with a record of the previous polls, that date back to 1980.

    KO (April 1995)



    The Ring (April 2007)

    "Boxing is like jazz. The better it is, the less people appreciate it."

    George Foreman

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Ten Years Ago Today
    By marbleheadmaui in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-27-2011, 04:35 AM
  2. Well, I am 14 years old today...
    By Youngblood in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 07:16 PM
  3. 10 Years Ago Today: Holyfield-Tyson II.
    By BoomBoom in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-29-2007, 04:48 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2025 Saddo Boxing - Boxing