If Holyfield was a few years younger against Lewis

Except that Holyfield wasn't robbed in the second, but Lewis was clearly robbed in the first. If you'd said that, you'd have gotten it right.

 

Evander was clearly robbed in my opinion and most others.

 

I guess that the Holyfield fan will always ask the following question:

Was there some pinnacle of Holyfield’s career (whenever you like), where he would theoretically have beaten Lewis, Bowe, Tyson, or even any available version of Tyson.

If so then an impressive panorama unfolds, where he dominates the cruiserweight division, then wins the lineal title in an era of giants. He then goes on to be the best heavyweight of that era, and when everybody assumes that he is done he arguably beats Valuev, stretching his world class form over a ridiculous period!

 

Really Swag don't you get tired of being wrong all the time.


There were two polls, the one you brought up asking if Holyfield was robbed in the second fight, about 70% said he wasn't.


http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=13192


In the poll you started you asked who would win prime for prime between the two fighters, and Lewis won that poll too, albeit by a smaller margin. (I think it was 58% or something like that)

So let's see you spin this away..

 

I bought up those polls to call you out on your bull****. (which I have yet to see a response) Also, just because the majority of the classic forum (who actually voted) had Lewis the winner, that doesn't mean the majority of everyone overall thought Lewis deserved the verdict.

42 out of 48 ringside reporters had Holyfield the clear winner and they included the british press association. But what do they know right?

 

Face facts, you lost to me yet again.

The reason I don't respond to some of your questions, is because they are mere tangents in the discussion we're having and going in those directions are meaningless.

You have a poll that people HERE voted on and the results speak for themselves.

70% of the people who voted, on this very site, said the second fight was fairly scored.

How bloody more decisive do you want?

 

How so?

Um no, the reason you don't respond is because you know you've been been caught in a lie.

Yes because I'd believe people on a forum rather than 42 people at ringside.

Your argument simply doesn't compute because you are stubborn and hypocritcal.