Holyfield 89-91 vs Holyfield 96-97

Tyson had no plan B. He came back to an empty corner. Holyfield would be fighting a different fight to Douglas, but if Tyson struggled with Holyfield I think the same thing would happen that happened in 96. I just think earlier on the stylistic matchup always favor's Tyson, because if you fought with Tyson, you would get your head handed to you, and I think Tyson would have taken Holyfield much more seriously and I believe Tyson's timing and overall ability was still a lot better.
Tyson changed his corner after losing to Douglas and you saw and heard better instructions from Giachetti, getting Tyson to use his jab, punch in combination, and come into fights in better shape.

 

IMO the best Tyson always beats the best Holyfield, and I feel Tyson regressed very quickly after the Spinks fight.

 

Holyfield was hurt badly against Cooper and Bowe. It would be interesting to see Tyson on the other end. He would have been the best finisher Holyfield ever fought.

 

96 Holyfield really wasn't an improvement as some would suggest, it was a way of covering up his newfound limitations; namely a growing number of injuries and his rapidly failing speed and stamina. There was certainly some advantages to his more physical style but not as many as when he could move and put together high volume combinations for 12 rounds.

And its not like 96 Evander didn't get hurt against Tyson either. He got rocked a few times and had to fight his way out. Just clinching doesn't work against Mike, even than. You can survive that way, but ultimately you have to back him up with your own firepower if you want to win, and that's what Holyfield would always have done.

 

You say Holyfield of '90 may have been to small for Tyson, but Bonecrusher just posted a video of '90 Holyfield trouncing a 235 lb heavyweight puncher (that was 23-0, 23 KO's- a record to start a career at the time?).. see rd 6. Real good fight between two contenders at that time. He went from there to Douglas and Foreman?

Holyfield of '90 (pushing 30 yrs old) was still 4 yrs older than Tyson, with as much or more boxing experience, perhaps. He would have went right back down low-blow on Tyson if Mike strayed low then too, etc., just like he did in '96. Tyson wouldn't have overwhelmed Holyfield in '90.

 

Holyfield at a younger age was a much better fighter, he had a lot more intensity and threw a hell of a lot more punches and combinations. He would have always beaten Tyson IMO, pretty gutting we never got to see it in the early 90's.

 

Pretty much the same as when Ali got the question who would win of his younger and older self. The younger, quicker and busier version takes it. The chance the older version has is to sucker in the younger less experienced version in on a big punch. Holy was always prone to get into exchanges, but on the other hand I don't see the older Holy, or really any fighter, knocking him out.

 

1989-91, actually '92 Holyfield stood toe to toe too much. But, he did outbox Foreman and Holmes. Of course, they were old and slow. The '95-'96 Holyfield fought smartly against Tyson. Would he have done the same if he had fought Tyson in '91? Who knows. If he fought the way he fought Dokes, Stewart and Cooper, Tyson kos him.