tyson v foreman

[ross davis]

how close to happening was this in the early 90s

[mr. magoo]

very apparently, as was Shavers v Tyson. Earnie has said many times that Tyson turned him down. Don't know how true that is as in I don't know if Tyson DID turn him down, but that's definitely what Earnie said.

In the thick of things during the early 90's, I never remembered any discussion of a possible matchup between Tyson or Shavers. Frankly, I don't know what would even warrant that fight happening. Sounds like Shavers was just talking shit.

[DavidPayne]

They wouldn't put a veteran Tyson in with Mercer, so a young protege version of Tyson wouldn't have been risked against Earnie.

The mther fkker could punch.

[Duodenum]

After numerous wins during his second career, Big George would hype up the audience by repeatedly chanting, "I want Tyson, I want Tyson!" He would tell the television interviewers that Tyson Chicken wasn't used to facing a predator like himself.

Tyson Chicken was (is) always terrified of Foreman, and he knew that George was fully aware of that fact. (Likewise, Holmes knew that Foreman wanted no part of Larry either. How many boxers in history have surprised themselves by winning matches they expected, in their heart of hearts, to lose going in? Foreman almost certainly breathed a sigh of relief when his bout with Holmes fell through on the eve of it.)

Holmes/Foreman did nearly come off though. Tyson Chicken never responded to George's outspoken challenges.

Larry has always maintained that he would come back to to the ring for a crack at Foreman. Likewise, it's a very open secret that George would return to competition if his opponent (hapless victim) was Tyson Chicken.

[TBooze]

After Holyfield/Foreman (early 91) it was talked of a lot, I think neither party got an offer which they could accept though, and then Tyson got locked up it and that was that.

Tyson/Shavers:admin never ever heard of that even being talked about. Shavers retired in 83 (Tyson was not even a pro) then had one bout in 87, when Tyson was reaching his peak, the fight was never a go'er

[DavidPayne]

Foreman is one of many fighters Tyson didn't face.

Mercer, Lewis (until it barely mattered), Bowe, Witherspoon (I know Tim capitulated against Smith to nix the fight), Moorer, Golota (until Golota had been exposed), Byrd, Klitschko, McCall and Tua.

Post Douglas his record is pretty shallow. Shameful for an era regarded as pretty weak. In the meantime, Seldon, Savarese, Norris, Williams, McBride, McNeeley, Botha etc were all accomodated.

I think Foreman at his best, old version, would have given Tyson problems but I'm not sure he;'d have beaten him.

[AnthonyJ74]

Foreman would call out Tyson right after smashing a guy like Tom Trimm or Carlos Hernandez. Foreman was like a guy who won a post as a city councilman demanding entry into the presidential race.

[TBooze]

Foreman would call out Tyson right after smashing a guy like Tom Trimm or Carlos Hernandez. Foreman was like a guy who won a post as a city councilman demanding entry into the presidential race.

It worked in that it got Foreman noticed without the need to take huge risks. And the Holyfield fight proved that Foreman could at least be in the same ring as Tyson without humilating himself.

Like I said, it was not really there as a fight until after Holyfield/Foreman. And in 91/92 it was at the very least a intresting match-up. I think Tyson would of been a warm favourite, but I would not of been putting the morgage on it.;)

[mr. magoo]

well it's the poor bastards best story so if it's shit then I for one am gutted!!

think he spoke about it being before Tyson won any world titles actually, as a warm up fight, but Mike's team said Earnie hit too hard.

he's a really pleasant chap is Earnie, and would probably have won a world title today no problemo, so 'IF' he's full of shit on this one he's entitled to it.

Well, if there was talk about it before Tyson won any belts, then the time frame would have been around 1985/86, when Mike was maybe 19 years old, and Earnie was more or less semi-retired. I think he left boxing around 1983, and picked up a single bout in 1987. That being said, I'm not sure where exactly these two guy's career paths would have crossed. My guess is that it was mainly gossip.

[TBooze]

well Shavers told me that the fight was on the cards at one point himself, so if it isnt true not only is it a shame, it's one of my best drunken stories out of the window.

I would not feel sorry for him, all the best stories are always built on half truths anyway, and Shavers seems to be as well as nice bloke, a good story teller. Also I am not Clayton, Jacobs or Don King so who knows it may of been on the table?:good

[ironchamp]

After numerous wins during his second career, Big George would hype up the audience by repeatedly chanting, "I want Tyson, I want Tyson!" He would tell the television interviewers that Tyson Chicken wasn't used to facing a predator like himself.

Tyson Chicken was (is) always terrified of Foreman, and he knew that George was fully aware of that fact. (Likewise, Holmes knew that Foreman wanted no part of Larry either. How many boxers in history have surprised themselves by winning matches they expected, in their heart of hearts, to lose going in? Foreman almost certainly breathed a sigh of relief when his bout with Holmes fell through on the eve of it.)

Holmes/Foreman did nearly come off though. Tyson Chicken never responded to George's outspoken challenges.

Larry has always maintained that he would come back to to the ring for a crack at Foreman. Likewise, it's a very open secret that George would return to competition if his opponent (hapless victim) was Tyson Chicken.

Problem is Tyson had absolutely nothing to gain from a Foreman fight. The fact that he fought Ruddock instead was commendable. Ruddock was a big puncher, and considered a threat to the crown and was ranked #2 behind Tyson on all three sanctioning bodies.

The Forman fight would have been a novelty.

[ChrisPontius]

Problem is Tyson had absolutely nothing to gain from a Foreman fight. The fact that he fought Ruddock instead was commendable. Ruddock was a big puncher, and considered a threat to the crown and was ranked #2 behind Tyson on all three sanctioning bodies.

The Forman fight would have been a novelty.

Who's to say Foreman wanted to fight Tyson anyway? Anyone can scream "I want Tyson! I want Tyson!" (and in fact many did) but getting in the ring with him is a different story.

From Foreman's record it is clear that he had absolutely no interest in taking a risk fight when there was not a title on the line. Tyson did not have a title and posed a huge risk, hence i doubt Foreman would want to fight him.

[TBooze]

Who's to say Foreman wanted to fight Tyson anyway? Anyone can scream "I want Tyson! I want Tyson!" (and in fact many did) but getting in the ring with him is a different story.

From Foreman's record it is clear that he had absolutely no interest in taking a risk fight when there was not a title on the line. Tyson did not have a title and posed a huge risk, hence i doubt Foreman would want to fight him.

I slightly differ: I would say Foreman would not take a risk unless the money was right, rather than if a championship was on the line.

If the money was right, Foreman would of fought Tyson IMO. Would he of won? Probably not, but I suspect his performance would not of let anyone down.

[ironchamp]

I slightly differ: I would say Foreman would not take a risk unless the money was right, rather than if a championship was on the line.

If the money was right, Foreman would of fought Tyson IMO. Would he of won? Probably not, but I suspect his performance would not of let anyone down.

Foreman was always about the money. That would have convinced him.
But there are some that say Tyson avoided him as though he was scared.

At the time beating Foreman wouldnt have gotten him the respect that beating Ruddock would have and If I remember correctly, Holyfield's win over Foreman drew criticism from some. Holyfield was viewed (and thats how I saw him) as an inbetween Champion until Tyson was ready to take his belts back. The Bowe really increased Holyfield's stock despite the losing effort. The rematch made him legit.

[Duodenum]

Foreman certainly did not avoid Cooney and Morrison. He was always awesome against sluggers. Few people expected that Morrison could elude George the way Tommy proved willing and able to, once the bell rang. (If Foreman had seen Morrison moving and boxing like that prior to their matchup, he probably never would have stepped in the ring with him.)

George was far stronger physically than anybody else Tyson had faced, and Mike simply didn't have the firepower to dent Foreman's chin. Even if he had, George would have kept him shoved to the outside, and on the back foot. Tyson would have had considerably difficulty just getting close enough to Foreman to land a scoring blow. Even if he managed to avoid George's slow ponderous swings, he'd still have to get within range of those massive arms to even attempt to score himself. Then, he'd get tossed around like a rag doll, just as the much larger Morrison did. Two things we could always count on, were referees allowing Ali to get away with his head and neck pulling antics in clinches, and Foreman shoving smaller and weaker opponents back by their shoulders at arm's length.

Like Morrison, Tyson had perfectly broad shoulders for George to push away on. Unlike Morrison, Tyson didn't have the height or reach necessary to score in spite of George's maulings. Jimmy Young was 6'2" and had a style predicated on retreating and countering. Ron Lyle could match Foreman's height and reach with his own, as could Ali. Tyson would have been horribly overmatched physically. The Foreman of the Tyson era was the most physically strong world class boxer who has ever lived. In training, he was known to run up mountains for two hours, nonstop. The man was a total freak, aerobically and anaerobically.

This matchup wouldn't have been a punching contest or a boxing performance, but a sumo wrestling meet, first and foremost. No way does Tyson control that situation. (And if he tries biting George's ear off like he did Holyfield's immediately after Evander shoved him several feet backwards, Mike would be leaving the ring in a bodybag.)

[ChrisPontius]

Foreman certainly did not avoid Cooney and Morrison. He was always awesome against sluggers.

What historical evidence is there for this?

In his career he fought the sluggers: Lyle, Cooney, Morrison and Briggs.
Counting the Briggs fights as a win, his record is 3-1. However, Cooney was coked up and hadn't been active for 3 years and even back then lost to a light heavyweight, Lyle was a big struggle as he was down twice and arguably saved by the bell, and the very limited Morrison boxed his ears off. I would hardly say his record against sluggers is awesome. In fact, he's less proven against them than Tyson is. Tyson twice defeated Ruddock, slugged it out with Berbick, had no trouble beating Bruno who's KO record is far above Lyle nor showed problems with Witherspoon (who had a one-punch KO over Weaver) and Tucker.

[McGrain]

I pick Tyson to beat Foreman. He's by far the better composite puncher & Foreman is an open fighter. That will do for me.

[JohnThomas1]

Comparing the threat of peak Tyson to Morrison and Cooney is about as good as comparing Chuck Wepner to peak Foreman.

[TBooze]

Comparing the threat of peak Tyson to Morrison and Cooney is about as good as comparing Chuck Wepner to peak Foreman.

Oh come on, I think Wepner would have enough class to carry Foreman at least six rounds.;)

[JohnThomas1]

Oh come on, I think Wepner would have enough class to carry Foreman at least six rounds.;)

:lol:

[mr. magoo]

What historical evidence is there for this?

In his career he fought the sluggers: Lyle, Cooney, Morrison and Briggs.
Counting the Briggs fights as a win, his record is 3-1. However, Cooney was coked up and hadn't been active for 3 years and even back then lost to a light heavyweight, Lyle was a big struggle as he was down twice and arguably saved by the bell, and the very limited Morrison boxed his ears off. I would hardly say his record against sluggers is awesome. In fact, he's less proven against them than Tyson is. Tyson twice defeated Ruddock, slugged it out with Berbick, had no trouble beating Bruno who's KO record is far above Lyle nor showed problems with Witherspoon (who had a one-punch KO over Weaver) and Tucker.

Ummm,

I believe you're leaving out a couple of the best performances of his career in Frazier and Norton. The Frazier fight gives us a lot of insite as to how Foreman would match up to Tyson stylistically. Secondly, Gerry Cooney wasn't coked up at the time he fought Foreman. He was clean for the first time in years and training with Gil Clancy, who formerly trained George and knew more about him than most people. Foreman lost to Morrison, but that was mainly due to a fighter drastically changing his style for one fight. Tyson would never abandon his slugger style to use the ring and box, so the Morrison loss is immaterial when looking at a Tyson-Foreman matchup. Tyson indeed beat Razor Ruddock, but I don't think Ruddock's style even remotely resembled Foreman's, and whoever said Berbick was a slugger?

[JohnThomas1]

Ummm,

I believe you're leaving out a couple of the best performances of his career in Frazier and Norton. The Frazier fight gives us a lot of insite as to how Foreman would match up to Tyson stylistically.

I think Chris is staying more in the 90's version of Foreman vs Tyson train of thought. The Foreman from the first era and second era are two totally different fighters. Me, i think the 70's version beats Tyson, but i'm far from convinced the 90's version does.

[ChrisPontius]

Ummm,

I believe you're leaving out a couple of the best performances of his career in Frazier and Norton. The Frazier fight gives us a lot of insite as to how Foreman would match up to Tyson stylistically. Secondly, Gerry Cooney wasn't coked up at the time he fought Foreman. He was clean for the first time in years and training with Gil Clancy, who formerly trained George and knew more about him than most people. Foreman lost to Morrison, but that was mainly due to a fighter drastically changing his style for one fight. Tyson would never abandon his slugger style to use the ring and box, so the Morrison loss is immaterial when looking at a Tyson-Foreman matchup. Tyson indeed beat Razor Ruddock, but I don't think Ruddock's style even remotely resembled Foreman's, and whoever said Berbick was a slugger?

As JT said, i was talking about the 70's Foreman.

Second, Cooney was addicted to coke like most 80's fighters and he hadn't had a fight in 3 years, he was washed up and got knocked out like a washed up fighter. He didn't exactly look impressive against Spinks either, save the 3rd or 4th round.

Also, Norton and Frazier are nothing like Tyson. Norton basically got knocked out by every puncher he faced (except maybe Bobick who never accounted to much when facing top opposition and an old Quarry). Frazier was a pressure fighter in the sense that he started slow, did not score one-punch knockouts but broke you down, down the stretch. Tyson on the contrary may well be the fastest starter in history, is capable of scoring one-punch knockouts, is not as easily dropped as Frazier but is not really capable of wearing an opponent down as it goes past 6 like Frazier could.

[mr. magoo]

[quote=ChrisPontius]As JT said, i was talking about the 70's Foreman.


Sorry, I saw that you had listed Ron Lyle among the names of punchers that he beat, to which you gave him a record of 3-1.


Second, Cooney was addicted to coke like most 80's fighters and he hadn't had a fight in 3 years, he was washed up and got knocked out like a washed up fighter. He didn't exactly look impressive against Spinks either, save the 3rd or 4th round.

I'm well aware of the fact that Cooney was passed his prime and hadn't fought in quite some time. I watched his fight with Foreman live on PPV back in 1990. For the record, he was clean by that point, and showed up in good shape. He looked alright in the first round of that fight.

Also, Norton and Frazier are nothing like Tyson.

I'll agree that Norton was a very dissimilar fighter, but Frazier and Tyson had some commonalities.


Tyson on the contrary may well be the fastest starter in history, is capable of scoring one-punch knockouts, is not as easily dropped as Frazier but is not really capable of wearing an opponent down as it goes past 6 like Frazier could.


Perhaps, but I don't see this strategy as being very effective against a fighter like Foreman.

[mr. magoo]

I think Chris is staying more in the 90's version of Foreman vs Tyson train of thought. The Foreman from the first era and second era are two totally different fighters. Me, i think the 70's version beats Tyson, but i'm far from convinced the 90's version does.

Could be the case, except I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility of even a 43 year old Foreman taking that one. Also keep in mind, that if Foreman and Tyson had met in the 90's, it wouldn't exactly be a prime Tyson either. We're not talking about the Tyson who Ko'd Pinklon Thomas in 1987, but rather a less focussed and less disciplined version.

[JohnThomas1]

Could be the case, except I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility of even a 43 year old Foreman taking that one. Also keep in mind, that if Foreman and Tyson had met in the 90's, it wouldn't exactly be a prime Tyson either. We're not talking about the Tyson who Ko'd Pinklon Thomas in 1987, but rather a less focussed and less disciplined version.

Yeah i'm trying to work the timeline. I was looking at say the Foreman who beat Cooper fighting what would have been peak Tyson. Foreman was 18 fights into his second career. I wonder if he was rated top 10 by any of the organisations so as to enable a shot.

[mr. magoo]

Yeah i'm trying to work the timeline. I was looking at say the Foreman who beat Cooper fighting what would have been peak Tyson. Foreman was 18 fights into his second career. I wonder if he was rated top 10 by any of the organisations so as to enable a shot.

Foreman didn't breach the top 10 ratings until around February of 1990, following his knockout of Cooney. After that, he rose very quickley through the top ten, probably by means of both public interest as well as elimination of other fighters beating each other. The Rodriguez win boosted him from the lower parts of the top 10 to the top 5. I probably still have a stack of 1990 issues of ring magazines somewhere in the basement back at mom and dad's house.

[ChrisPontius]

I think the Tyson that fought Holyfield in '96/'97 still had too much speed and ability for Foreman to overcome. When he declined after that, the comebacking Foreman would've a much better chance. But since Foreman more or less retired in '98, i don't think Foreman could've ever beaten Tyson in his second career.

[ChrisPontius]

I will add that i have also read the stories about Tyson not wanting to face Foreman. It could be true, who knows. Maybe d'Amato's words kept resounding in Tyson's head. But based on film and performances around that period, i don't think Mike had much to fear.

He didn't have much to gain from it either, by the way. Up to that point, Foreman had only beaten washed up ex-contenders and journeymen and it would take untill 1995 for him to have a win of big significance. Many people sympathised with Foreman but after losing rather one-sided fights to Holyfield and Morrison. When Stewart (who Tyson knocked out in 1 round) turned Foreman into a zombie with a hamburger face, they wanted him to retire.
Ruddock posed a much larger threat and reward, so he fought him. Tyson cannot be blamed for not fighting Foreman (although i'm not suggesting that you do).

[mr. magoo]

I will add that i have also read the stories about Tyson not wanting to face Foreman. It could be true, who knows. Maybe d'Amato's words kept resounding in Tyson's head. But based on film and performances around that period, i don't think Mike had much to fear.

He didn't have much to gain from it either, by the way. Up to that point, Foreman had only beaten washed up ex-contenders and journeymen and it would take untill 1995 for him to have a win of big significance. Many people sympathised with Foreman but after losing rather one-sided fights to Holyfield and Morrison. When Stewart (who Tyson knocked out in 1 round) turned Foreman into a zombie with a hamburger face, they wanted him to retire.
Ruddock posed a much larger threat and reward, so he fought him. Tyson cannot be blamed for not fighting Foreman (although i'm not suggesting that you do).

Not at all,

In fact, I never felt that Tyson ducked Foreman. I simply think however that in 1995-96, Foreman would have given a returning Tyson problems, but opinions vary on this subject.

[ChrisPontius]

Okay.

How much of an underdog would you make the Tyson that destroyed Spinks against the Foreman that destroyed Frazier?

[mr. magoo]

Okay.

How much of an underdog would you make the Tyson that destroyed Spinks against the Foreman that destroyed Frazier?

I would never make either of these fighters tremendous underdogs against each other, no matter what phase of their careers they were in. To answer your question, however I would likely favour Foreman by a narrow margin, due to the fact that he took the title from an all time great heavyweight champion who was in fact, trying to retain his belt. Although, Tyson's win over Spinks was impressive, I can't help but think that Spinks was not as interested in regaining the title, as Frazier was in keeping it. In fact, for years I felt that he went into that fight with the mentality that he was a mere lamb for the slaughter, and performed accordingly. Frazier did not step in the ring with Foreman thinking that he was going to leave a former champion.

You already mentioned that Frazier and Tyson had noticeable differences, and frankly I agree with you. The fact remains however, that both of those men were at least similar in size, stature and fighting style. Not to mention, I don't know how much heart or guts Tyson would show if he were to get floored multiple times in a single round. Would he get up? Would he be able to compose himself? Would he continue to fight clean or resort to dirty tactics? These are all questions that I can't answer, and nor could anyone else for that matter.

One thing is for certain, Foreman is not a man to be taken lightely. For decades, people have torn his fighting style to shreads, saying that he was clumbsy, slow, and had poor endurance. He also has been criticised for his opposition. throughout these crticisms however he continued to rack up KO's, and became a two time world champion despite being an underdog in both instances. George is a fighter who I would take very seriously no matter who his opponent was, and more particulary against a man who at one point, was knocked out by Buster Douglas.

[AnthonyJ74]

Foreman didn't breach the top 10 ratings until around February of 1990, following his knockout of Cooney. After that, he rose very quickley through the top ten, probably by means of both public interest as well as elimination of other fighters beating each other. The Rodriguez win boosted him from the lower parts of the top 10 to the top 5. I probably still have a stack of 1990 issues of ring magazines somewhere in the basement back at mom and dad's house.

It was unbelievable the way Foreman first breached and then ascended the heavyweight rankings. He was unrated prior to beating Gerry Cooney. He starches Cooney, an inactive, unranked, and fragile fighter, in two rounds, and then all of a sudden Big George is in the top ten. Prior to him fighting Holyfield, he was ranked somewhere between number five and number eight if I recall correctly. Then, when the fight with Holyfield was signed, and after George knocked out one final creampuff, Foreman was mysteriously ranked as high as number two by one of the major sanctioning bodies. The top three spots alternated between Mike Tyson, Razor Ruddock, and George Foreman. But how did Foreman get rated so highly? And how do you explain his being elevated as high as number two only after the Holyfield fight was signed for? Also, prior to Foreman's fight with Alex Stewart, he was ranked number one by the IBF.....Maybe a little "donation" was made to IBF President Bob Lee.

[AnthonyJ74]

I will add that i have also read the stories about Tyson not wanting to face Foreman. It could be true, who knows. Maybe d'Amato's words kept resounding in Tyson's head. But based on film and performances around that period, i don't think Mike had much to fear.

He didn't have much to gain from it either, by the way. Up to that point, Foreman had only beaten washed up ex-contenders and journeymen and it would take untill 1995 for him to have a win of big significance. Many people sympathised with Foreman but after losing rather one-sided fights to Holyfield and Morrison. When Stewart (who Tyson knocked out in 1 round) turned Foreman into a zombie with a hamburger face, they wanted him to retire.
Ruddock posed a much larger threat and reward, so he fought him. Tyson cannot be blamed for not fighting Foreman (although i'm not suggesting that you do).

I still don't get how Foreman was considered such a huge threat that so many top fighters didn't face. He talked and play-acted his way into the Holyfield fight. Guys like Mike Tyson and Razor Ruddock were busy fighting each other - a rarity to have two top heavyweights fight each other - and the following year Lennox Lewis willingly fought top-rated Razor Ruddock when no other heavyweight seemed to incline to do so. Remember how Riddick Bowe declined Razor Ruddock's challenge to a fight on more than one occasion? Bowe, by way of some rather warped logic, felt that Pierre Coetzer was a better fighter in which to earn his shot against Holyfield; I guess he felt Ruddock wasn't worthy enough.

The point being, George Foreman didn't fight anybody worthwhile back when there was a good crop of heavyweights on the scene. Even Larry Holmes, whom I have criticized a time or two, willingly fought a good fighter in Ray Mercer to legitimately earn his shot against Holyfield - something Foreman did not do. Foreman would talk tough but when it came right down to it, there was very little substance.

[ChrisPontius]

I agree. Probably it was similar to how he payed $250.000 to be allowed to fight Crimsley instead of a mandatory.

[kerrminator]

Tyson would have done what he did to Holmes

[mr. magoo]

It was unbelievable the way Foreman first breached and then ascended the heavyweight rankings. He was unrated prior to beating Gerry Cooney. He starches Cooney, an inactive, unranked, and fragile fighter, in two rounds, and then all of a sudden Big George is in the top ten. Prior to him fighting Holyfield, he was ranked somewhere between number five and number eight if I recall correctly. Then, when the fight with Holyfield was signed, and after George knocked out one final creampuff, Foreman was mysteriously ranked as high as number two by one of the major sanctioning bodies. The top three spots alternated between Mike Tyson, Razor Ruddock, and George Foreman. But how did Foreman get rated so highly? And how do you explain his being elevated as high as number two only after the Holyfield fight was signed for? Also, prior to Foreman's fight with Alex Stewart, he was ranked number one by the IBF.....Maybe a little "donation" was made to IBF President Bob Lee.

There were a lot of heavyweights in the top 10 picture of 1989-1990 who probably shouldn't have been there. Carl Williams, who after he was starched in 1 round by Tyson ( the only fight he had between 1988-1990 ) was rated as high as number 3 for over a year after. Greg Page re-entered the top ten after losing to Orlin Norris, and was quickley knocked out by journeyman Mark Wills. Renaldo Snipes hadn't beaten a ranked contender in years, yet he was like #7 by the WBC at one point in 1990. Alex Stewart had never beaten anyone better than Dave Jaco, and he was #2 when he fought Evander Holyfield. Douglas got his title shot at Tyson by decisioning an aging Berbick. The list goes on and on. That being said, Foreman probably wasn't any less deserving of top ten berth, then most of the men who were in it. He at least stayed more active than any of the current crop at the time, and who's wins over Cooney, Martin, Cooper, and Rodriguez were likely as good or better than many of the journeyman and club fighters that Snipes, Ribalta, Norris, Page, Mason, and Witherspoon were figting to stay alive. Plus he was scoring back to back early round knockouts, whereas some of those other guys were barely winning decisions over bums.

It wasn't until between 1991 and 1992, when some of the 88' Olympic prospects like Mercer, Bowe, Lewis, plus Morrison and Seldon began working their way up, that the divsion began showing promise again, along with ratings that were more justified.