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