Will history be kind to Evander Holyfield?

I think his career will be viewed fairly.

Most people don't look at the past 10 years or so, they look at the amazing cruiserweight during the 1980s and as being a brutally tough heavyweight in the 1990s who always came with his best effort and ready to throw down.

He's not currently viewed as a heavyweight H2H beast, he's not currently viewed as a great, consistent heavyweight champion, he's viewed as a man who would give anyone a tough night and as a very solid champion with many good wins and was willing to duke it out with anyone.

I think most have him rated between 8 and 13, which is fair. I don't see that changing much unless another crop of great heavyweights should pop up, which I don't see happening within the next 10 years.

 

My observation would be that a fighters resume stands the test of time very well, if subsequent generations of fighters are unable to match it.

Harry Greb, Joe Louis, and Archie Moore are obvious examples of this.

Now the question you have to ask yourself, is when we will next see a cruiserweight champion enjoy the sucess and longevity at heavyweight that Holyfield did.

 

No he will get higher in the rankings i believe as he goes on

 

I hope history will be kind to him, he fought everyone in a loaded era.

I think since his prime his standing an an ATG has slipped. Maybe because he was the last great heavyweight before the rise of the super heavies, maybe because he lost too many times and was not as dominant as some champions or perhaps the suspicion of steroid use or the liberal use of his head diminished his standing.

For me his wins over such names as Bowe, Moorer, Tyson, Mercer, Foreman, and Holmes guarantee him a place in my top 10.

 

He should be, took on everyone and beat everyone he faced up until his 37th birthday. He didn't lose until he was 32 after been a pro for 8 years winning a title in only 12 fights then unifying the whole division. Beat more lineal world champions than anyone I believe (certainly more titlists)

He has a good case for P4P Top 10 of all time

His pre-title run is 1 of the best in history, but look at his resume anyway:

Bowe
Tyson
Buster Douglas
Moorer
Holmes
Foreman
Dokes
Pinklon Thomas
Rahman
Ruiz
Mercer
Bean
Alex Stewart
Bert Cooper

Losses: Lennox Lewis, Bowe x2, Moorer - all past prime

Cruser

Qawi x 2
De Leon
Ricky Parkey
Ocasio
Henry Tillman

Arguably the best P4P resume of all time

You don't have any problem with your hero Vitali taking steroids do you?

 

I'd like to think his standing will improve, especially in a p4p sense where I think he is severely underrated at the moment.

Holy had a remarkable career & produced so many memorable fights.

 

holyfield has the best resume of the 90's heavyweights, and one of the top resumes of all time. beat everybody he faced untill he was 37, with all those wars behind him, and he fought a prime lewis, he fought terribly in the first fight, as he did in a few of his fights, in the second fight, he showed some fight and made the fight a whole lot closer.

 

He was 32 and bald, yes I do.

Holyfield was also never caught in any pro tests, what's your point? Vitali tested positive for anabolic steroids, Holyfield did not.

Make no mistake with you spin that the banned substance was anabolic steroids, something he also undoubtedly took in the pros given the amount of muscle mass he gained.

As did Vitali, Vitali went from a skinny 200lber to 240+ in just a few years and whenever he is away from the ring he loses weight.

You can rank him where you want, but that's your opinion, resume wise he has a case for top 3 so it depends on your criteria.

 

Holy is certainly greater than vitali and Jeffries by any measure.

 

Vitally easily.

Jeffries is more debatable.

 

Yea ok

Bowe
Tyson
Buster Douglas
Moorer
Holmes
Foreman
Dokes
Pinklon Thomas
Rahman
Ruiz
Mercer
Bean
Alex Stewart
Bert Cooper

Losses: Lennox Lewis, Bowe x2, Moorer - all past prime

Cruser

Qawi x 2
De Leon
Ricky Parkey
Ocasio
Henry Tillman

 

It all depends what you value in a resume.

Anyway, to avoid mission creep.

 

I think his pound for pound resume is pretty good even if his H2H resume might suffer. Holyfield lost ten times and drew twice with some of the best heavyweights of all time, routinely outweighed by 30-50 pounds. That sounds a lot like Sam Langford to me. Johnson was a better heavy for his time but he outweighed Langford by a good twenty pounds, so we say that Johnson was the better fighter but Langford is better p4p. Lewis was better H2H but if Holyfield were the same size he'd have destroyed him. Langford had about 40 losses and 50 draws on his resume but since they were to guys like Harry Wills, Sam McVey, and Joe Jeanette and since he fought until he was 43 and blind in one eye, a lot of those defeats are written off. In comparison, Holyfield boxed until he was 50 and only took 10 losses and 2 draws. Pretty respectable.