Why was Ali's return from exile that much more successful than Tysons?

[Ben Bolt]

They were both exiled from Boxing for roughly the same amount of time and both came back at ~29 years old. Ali however had a second coming that would define his legacy, Tyson not so much. Why the difference?

Ali was more dedicated to the sport, he identified himself as a boxer.
Lots of fighters don’t, once the big money is dropping in (and why should they?).

Ali has several gift decisions that went in his favor

Actually, some of the later Ali fights were pretty dull to watch as he got away with holding his opponents by the neck. The blame is on the referees, who allowed it.
Still, his devotion for the sport is admirable. And QueensburyRules, “Fat Lar” had the same devotion. That’s why they are labeled great.

[QueensburyRules]

Ali was more dedicated to the sport, he identified himself as a boxer.
Lots of fighters don’t, once the big money is dropping in (and why should they?).


Actually, some of the later Ali fights were pretty dull to watch as he got away with holding his opponents by the neck. The blame is on the referees, who allowed it.
Still, his devotion for the sport is admirable. And QueensburyRules, “Fat Lar” had the same devotion. That’s why they are labeled great.

- - Ali was not nearly so devoted to boxing after Frazier whooped him a new one. He lucked into the voodoo curse of Zaire and rode that new wave of popularity to the final grounding into the quicksand of his own design.

Lar's devotion was avoiding all the WBA champs, and later his WBC mandatory and subsequent champions that he helped create. Save for Norton's administrative title, his record vs champions is the poorest heavyweight record in the long archives of the sport.

But his wife and kids seem to love him as well as BS, so there's that.

[Ben Bolt]

Lar's devotion was avoiding all the WBA champs, and later his WBC mandatory and subsequent champions that he helped create.

No, Queensbury, you are just a revisionist.
We who were there at the time, knew very well who the World Champion was.

Who avoided who? Holmes was always ready to fight anyone. Don’t blame him.

You always attack Holmes, while it seems you have big faith in the unscrupulous boxing orgs (which is tiresome to listen to).
You should blame the orgs instead, for the fights that never happened..

[Willie Pep 229]

The Dunes Hotel and Casino, May 20th 1983 . . .

Michael Dokes vs. Mike Weaver for the WBA HW World Title.

Larry Holmes vs. Tim Weatherspoon for the WBC World HW Title.

Same night; same card.

That is a funny definition of 'world' - what does this nonsense, the HW World Championship being contested twice in one night say about the legitimacy of 'the world titles' at stake?

What does that say about the 'world champions' involved; what does it say about everyone else involved, the bodies, fighters, broadcasters, the fans who bought the BS?

That night discredited everyone involved, and exposed prize fighting for the sham the scationing bodies and HBO were making it.

All presented to the fans with a straight face with the understanding the fans will buy anything if you pitch it to them as a truth, even when it is in itself a total contradiction.

[JAB5239]

The Dunes Hotel and Casino, May 20th 1983 . . .

Michael Dokes vs. Mike Weaver for the WBA HW World Title.

Larry Holmes vs. Tim Weatherspoon for the WBC World HW Title.

Same night; same card.

That is a funny definition of 'world' - what does this nonsense, the HW World Championship being contested twice in one night say about the legitimacy of 'the world titles' at stake?

What does that say about the 'world champions' involved; what does it say about everyone else involved, the bodies, fighters, broadcasters, the fans who bought the BS?

That night discredited everyone involved, and exposed prize fighting for the sham the scationing bodies and HBO were making it.

All presented to the fans with a straight face with the understanding the fans will buy anything if you pitch it to them as a truth, even when it is in itself a total contradiction.

Without looking into it I'm betting it was a Don King card. King did everything and anything to make money. But that doesn't change the fact Holmes was the legitimate heavyweight champion of the world. He was lineal and held above all others in that regard. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of other cards with multiple championships being contested on the same card, at the same weight. Little doubt Holmes was the recognized champion in this instance though.

[JAB5239]

The Dunes Hotel and Casino, May 20th 1983 . . .

Michael Dokes vs. Mike Weaver for the WBA HW World Title.

Larry Holmes vs. Tim Weatherspoon for the WBC World HW Title.

Same night; same card.

That is a funny definition of 'world' - what does this nonsense, the HW World Championship being contested twice in one night say about the legitimacy of 'the world titles' at stake?

What does that say about the 'world champions' involved; what does it say about everyone else involved, the bodies, fighters, broadcasters, the fans who bought the BS?

That night discredited everyone involved, and exposed prize fighting for the sham the scationing bodies and HBO were making it.

All presented to the fans with a straight face with the understanding the fans will buy anything if you pitch it to them as a truth, even when it is in itself a total contradiction.

The question is why didn't Holmes unify with Dokes after this. The answer.....Dokes lost his next defense.

King always stood to make more money with two separate titles than one no matter who the recognized and lineal champion was.

[Anthony342]

The question is why didn't Holmes unify with Dokes after this. The answer.....Dokes lost his next defense.

King always stood to make more money with two separate titles than one no matter who the recognized and lineal champion was.

So King's a douche turd.

[JAB5239]

So King's a douche turd.

A very smart, calculating and manipulating douche turd.

[QueensburyRules]

The question is why didn't Holmes unify with Dokes after this. The answer.....Dokes lost his next defense.

King always stood to make more money with two separate titles than one no matter who the recognized and lineal champion was.

- - The answer is Weaver was the first Dokes defense, U know, the Weaver Lar never tried to rematch when Mike won his title anymore than trying to challenge Dokes for his first title defense...you're welcome...

[JAB5239]

- - The answer is Weaver was the first Dokes defense, U know, the Weaver Lar never tried to rematch when Mike won his title anymore than trying to challenge Dokes for his first title defense...you're welcome...

Two questions.....first, why would the heavyweight champion of the world need to challenge a mere trinket holder? Second, who was training Wilt in 1965 you jerkoff? You make things up in your perpetually inebriated mind but keep refusing to answer questions. Did you think I would forget?