Was Holyfield robbed in his rematch with Lennox Lewis?

The 2nd fight was close but after the fuss about decision in the first fight, I don’t think there was going to be any chance that the judges would have given the decision to holyfield.

 

Lewis should have been awarded the win in first fight and 100 per cent did win second fight.

This was a fight result that does not need reassesssing in my opinion, Lewis the winner

 

LOL@you,,,,

You are the biggest Tyson basher on here but now you need him to polish up Holyfield. Pathetic.

So on one end he is a bum but when it suits the agenda Tyson is a killer..........Holyfield beat a washed up version of Tyson who was not even remotely close to his form before the prison stint............so he beat Bruno again....jippy kay yeah.......most of Tysons fight after jail were circus shows.

Foreman ? LOL, Tommy Chin did it too,,,,,Stewart got jobbed and Schulz got robbed...........according to you beating ancient Forman is some great feather in your cap, it aint.

One more time, without Tyson Holyfield is 2-4 plus a gift draw. against Bowe/Lewis/Moorer......once he stepped up he lost more than he won. Fact.

 

Lewis won the first fight going away and tho the second was closer there was only one winner.

 

I've never said Tyson was a bum, but rather immensely overrated.

While clearly past prime, Tyson was not washed up. He still had a lot left in the tank hence why he was the massive favorite. On the other hand, Holy was the one perceived to be washed up. He'd just come back from retirement stemming from a life threatening heart condition.

Tyson lost Mcbride and Williams while much younger than Foreman was in his loss to Morrison. So does that mean Lewis and Holyfield's win mean nothing? Of course not.

Since we're throwing out wins, how about removing losses to? I'll remove the 2 Bowe losses and keep his win. So Holyfield has 4 wins and 1 loss. Not bad for someone who "lost more than he won" when stepping up.

 

Close fight that could’ve gone either way, so no robbery by definition.
It went to Lewis who got robbed in the first, so fair enough

 

I think that is a fair definition overall. Although in my view, Lewis sat back far too much in the first fight after he had things in control.

My gripe is that in both fights neither man fought enough like a challenger wanting to take something. They both fought like they were only defending a title and would be given the benefit of doubt. The vacant undisputed title was up for grabs here!

It’s not the way Ali and Frazier went about their business in 1971.

 

I thought Lewis took the first fight by four points, but I only had him ahead by two in the second.

The fact that Lewis couldn't stop a Holy who had already been creamed by Bowe (and I have a hard time buying the health issues, given the fact that he'd knocked down Bowe earlier in the same fight) puts him right behind Holy as an ATG imo.

That said, my top five looks like this:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Holyfield
5. Lewis

 

One could say the same about Mayweather Jr./Cotto and yet, on the scorecards, Mayweather won a comfortable-to-wide decision.

For me, it was really a fight in four acts; Lewis winning 1-5; Holyfield winning 6-7; Lewis then winning 8-11; Holyfield with an encore, winning round 12.

So that makes it 117-111 on my card. One could make a case for Holyfield winning the 9th, to narrow Lewis' win to 116-112.

Holyfield never looked like he was winning, in my opinion. And, judging by your card, you wouldn't have seen any point at which he was ahead in the bout, either.

 

My score card I had Lewis winning 1, 2, 4, 9,10 and 11.

Round 5 I gave to Holyfield but that was the only round out of all of them I felt could have also given to Lewis..

I had Holyfield winning 3,5, 6,7,8 and 12.

The pattern of the fight Lewis was ahead over the first 5 rounds to begin with. Holyfield came back and was one point up by round 7 only for it to level up by round 10.

I had it going all on the last two rounds but i gave them one each. There was nothing in it.

Lewis was sloppy.

 

The problem is activity or effectivity. Lewis was more active but less effective. Holyfield was less active but more effective.

 

Since the bout took place, I've spoken with plenty of people and read plenty of posters, who agree with 116-112 for Lewis (which is as close a card as I have scored for the bout, after several viewings over 20 years).

I do not think 116-112 is close so, as always on anything to do with Lewis, we will have to agree to disagree. It was a clear win for Lewis and would have been yet another travesty of scoring, had it been declared a draw or, worse still, gone to Holyfield.

 

They robbed each other

 

I

You seem to be overstating your case.

 

Hardly.