Michael Dokes vs Tony Tubbs

[triplejab34]

This is an interesting bout that features 2 heavyweights with quick hands.Who wins and why?

[KOJOE90]

Both in their primes I edge towards Tubbs on points.

[blv30]

In both their primes, I would go with Dokes.Tony could conceivably outbox Michael, but at some point, I think Dokes would catch him, and put him down.Tony didn't have the greatest chin, IMO.While it lasted, it would be pretty close.

[Overhand_Right]

Bonecrusher Smith, Greg Page, and Tim Witherspoon, all of whom hit much harder than Dokes, put some dingers on Tubbs jaw and couldnt so much as budge him. In his day it took only Mike Tyson to take Tubbs out. So Michael Dokes is definitely not doing it.

Dokes was a short arm puncher and would throw fast flurrys, but i cant see any of them landing on the Tubbs who could dart in & out and left Page and co swatting at the air.

Tubbs with his superior boxing brain, chin, skills, and power befuddles Dokes easily to a unanimous 15 rd decision IMO.

[TKO11]

Tough call IMO. Neither had big firepower, and both were very fast of hand. The problem I have with this one is that while on their best night both were very good, their best nights were absolutely erratic. And their "very good" nights were few and far between.

While I think the better fighter from a pure talent standpoint was Dokes, the guy couldn't be counted on to show up ANY night. Tubbs would show up, but sucked as often as he impressed. Dokes was faster for the first three rounds, but later in the fight Tubbs could be the speedier since Dokes always slowed down when he settled in.

Could be that Mike will be good enough early to look like he's going to cruise to a win, but against a Tubbs he'll likely fade and be outspeeded and out punched from the mid rounds on - and I agree Dokes isn't taking Tubbs out.

So I would favor Tubbs, mainly because his shitty nights weren't as shitty as Dokes's shitty nights.

How's that for a ringing endorsement?

[hawk5ins]

If for nothing else, form a pure physique standpoint (When in shape).

But there isn't anything that TKO just said that I can argue with.

I guess I agree with the: Tubbs sucked less more often than Dokes did, so I pick him, rationale.

Hawk

[robertk]

Dokes developed some bad habits even prior to the weaver fight that won't help him stylewise in this matchup. He had started becoming the flat-footed guy in there instead of moving those legs. And he really started dropping those hands and sticking that head up in the air.

I think those flaws leave too big of a window against a style like tubbs & Dokes loses a decision to the guy.

[Sharkey]

I agree with Robert. Dokes kind of morphed into a slugger when the KO's started to come. He loaded up those left hooks.

I don't think Tubbs had more power than Dokes, at all. And I also am not certain if he had better skills. He certainly did fight a more controlled fight than Dokes did, and Dokes brand of mayhem against Tony doesn't seem to me that it would work.

Dokes does the heavy hitting and the flashy flurries. As others have said, around round 4 or 5 Tubbs begins to sucker Dokes and land flurries after Dokes throws. Tubbs sticks, jukes and makes Dokes miss on the way to a decision in a fight where time is suspended and every round seems the same.

[robertk]

Yep.

The Dokes bout that really soured me on the guy was the first cobb bout. Geez, he should've had a picnic with a plodder and face first and predictable Cobb. But that new style and those bad habits made it far far too close of a bout. I actually think Dokes benefitted from the headbutt in their 2nd bout and was well on his way to a loss to Tex, when it was stopped.

I have a theory about heavyweights that are taken to the brink physically and fight a few rounds beyond exhaustion==I think their career drops about 33%. That's what happened to dokes in that 2nd weaver fight. And I thought then that was about it for the guy and pretty much was. Maybe Ron Lipton or others, can shed some insight if they buy that theory of mine==you just seldom see it anymore, especially w/ 12 round fights.

[hawk5ins]

WhenI realized he wasn't all that an a bag of chips.

After that fight I wondered where that brilliant amateur was.

It didn't take long for the realization to sink in that Dokes was a 3 round fighter. Perfectly suited for the amateurs.

Of course his "lifstyle" certainly didn't help.

Hawk

[blv30]

He should have stayed in the amateurs one more year.He was too light for me.

[Enswell]

Ah, this one's got to be a barn-burner. Just kick back, pop the top on your favorite beer, and let the action unfold!

[apollack]

Yeah, I see this as a pick 'em. No clue.

[blv30]

If Clarence Hill can floor this guy, than I think Dokes has a chance for stoppage.