Why is Holyfield given so much credit for the Bowe trilogy?

I think because Holy was a warrior who NEVER ducked anyone and took the best shots from the hardest hitters, and somehow found ways to beat guys who much bigger, sometimes quicker and had all the tools.

Had he retired after his Tyson 2 win, he'd be cemented as the #5 ATG.

 

What? He beat a great fighter at an enormous size disadvantage. Even his own trainer said he probably wouldn't win! Then in two other contests he put on ring classic quality performances with him. Why WOULDN'T he get wicked credit for that?

 

Because he's Commander Vander, the Real Deal, Evan Fields.

Winning is irrelevant to this mans fans.

 

He was a much smaller man mixing it up and slugging it out with the bigger Bowe.

 

Holyfield's win over Bowe was the more tainted win of the trilogy. Fan man benefited him moreso than Bowe.

 

The pair went to war for 32 rounds and produced one of the great trilogies of boxing history. It takes two to tango. So it's not all about Bowe.

 

He faced a prime, top level fighter in his era while facing a significant size disadvantage, and beat him. Not only that, in the fights he lost he was MORE than competitive.

For this and other reasons, Holyfield was the best HW of his era. You didn't see him facing faded greats or getting starched early by second rate fighters.

 

I don't think Holy won any of the fights imo, but how Bowe and Holy fought each other with the size difference is how fans imo wanted to see Haye and Wlad fight Saturday... Haye and Wlad didn't have to go toe to toe, but they should've engaged each other more.

 

He lost the trilogy, but won one of the fights. I was a great win. Also because Holyfield showed great heart in the three fights. That makes us imagine how he would do in some fantasy matchups.

 

Yes, two very similarly spelt men had big influences on that fight.

fan man for giving Holy a breather.
fat man for being fat (Bowe).

 

Yes, in Evan Field land (Would that be Evan Fields Fields, or just Evan Fields?), somehow losing a series of -admittedly good to watch -fights makes you the best fighter of a generation.

I still struggling with that concept.

He wins 1 of 3. Where Bowe was fat, and fan man helped.

I think the logic goes like this:

Holy is the best because he fought Bowe, and won 1/3 while being the little engine that could. That makes Holy great.
Bowe, beat Holy - who was great - for losing to Bowe - therefore, by beating a great, you are great.
Holy beat a great (Bowe) 1/3 times, and was competitive. But putting up a show like that against a great (Bowe), that, makes you great.


See. Easy.

Bowe is great because he beat Holy.
Holy is great because he lost to Bowe.

therefore, both are great.

 

And no, you didn't see Holyfield facing faded greats.

Those fights against Foreman and Holmes don't count. THEY NEVER HAPPENED.

And he didn't get starched by ham-n-eggers. He lost decisions to them. That's much better.