Vitali Klitschko vs Evander Holyfield

I think those are all fair points, except Tyson singling out HGH does not suggest he used steroids.
He could have thought they were the more effective drug. And he was big & strong before boxing 7 poor at 13, unlike Holyfield.

Oh & someone said Evander went from 190 to 210.
He actually went to 217 against Tyson-not checking if he got heavier laterf-& most importantly, remained quite lean.
And it was mostly all upper body mass, not legs-otherwise he would have been even heavier.

 

Vitaly was winning that fight on all scorecards.
Vitaly has defeated anyone he ever faced and would probably have retired undefeated if not for injuries.

This content is protected

Vitaly would beat Povetkin the same way Wladimir did.

 

He's talking exclusively in relation to Wlad. When reflecting on his career as a whole , he said Holyfield was smarter.

By cheating every minute of every round? Ok.

 

You mean, by cheating then.

 

Elaborate further

 

Say what? Wlad won every round vs Povektin and floored him more than once. Are you saying Ali beat Frazer by doing as often, because he did in the 2nd fight.

No one has to fall into a clinch. Just take note, Povektin who was a little bigger than Holyfield could do much in a clinch vs a bigger man, and neither could Holyfield, who I repeat should be 1-4 vs Lewis and Bowe, 1-1 vs Moorer and 0-2-1 vs John Ruiz on fair scorecards.

^^ If you want to debate this Man_Machine ^^ its a losing game you are welcome to play.

Only a fool would argue Holyfield deserved the draw vs. Lewis, however there is a legit argument that Bowe in the one fight he didn't win of the trilogy deserved a draw vs Holyfield.

Holyfield fans ( not saying you, but you can clarify ) have no business accusing anyone of cheating. Roids, head butts, and low blows. It makes clinching by design, which Vitali seldom did very puny.

 

It's interesting to see the double standards.Seemingly In Mike Tyson's case is the biggest problem his best wins don't prove
his greatness because he didn't beat quality opponents, but in Vitali's case the best wins aren't so important.

 

Potentially, the most disgraceful display by a Heavyweight Champion in the division's history. Certainly the worst I have ever witnessed.

A disqualification would not have been unwarranted (had any prior warnings been given at all, as they should have been).

A travesty of a fight and a stain on Wlad's claim to greatness.

 

1)Again Irrelevant for the purpose of this thread as we are not putting that version of Holyfield against Vitali.As for the first fight against Ruiz, it was a close fight and I thought Holyfield won by about point.It is a fight that could have gone either way, no robbery,The third fight with Ruiz, I thought Holyfield definitely won.
2) Irrelevant for the purpose of this thread.Vitali and Holyfield might have been on Peds or not, we can’t prove it.The thread is just about matching the best versions of Vitali against Holyfield.That is it.
3) The fight against Donald is irrelevant as Holyfield was largely past his prime.The fight against Bean, both Vitali and Holyfield won without controversy.Vitali was more dominant but what does it prove ?Bean does not fight like Vitali.So again, your point has very little relevance if at all.
4)Holyfield’ s record is 1-3-1.My guess is Vitali would do worse.His only chance would be against Bowe III.I still would slightly favour Bowe in that one as Vitali lost against a faded Lewis albeit in a valuable effort.But I could be wrong of course.
5) you agree for once
6) The argument goes both sides.If we are not talking could, Holyfield has a draw against Lewis for a fact.
7) Again Holyfield was past prime against Toney.So irrelevant.Vittali would beat that version of Holyfield, no doubt.But it is not subject matter of the thread.And do not forget VitalI lost in his prime against another slickster in Byrd although under mitigating conditions.
8) You question was how Moorer was ranked and I answered that question.
9) He was somewhat dirty but why do you bring up this point.Do you think Vitali would not be able to deal with it?
10) Foreman and Holmes were still good wins compared to Vitali’s record.Do not forget that Larry just beat Mercer.As I said VItali is not quite one Lewis level.I am also not saying Vitali would be an easy fight for prime Holyfield.I just think prime Evander would win a UD (2-4 points margin).

 

I think Eddie Futch claimed Ali clinched Frazier 76 times. And if you want to go far Back, Jack Johnson spent more time clinching than throwing punches. Maybe you just don't know your history well enough to qualify that statement. There have been far worse fouls.

 

Who said Tyson's best wins ( In the 1980's ) don't prove his greatness? Names please. Mike wasn'tl the same guy in the mid 1990's

 

LOL - Maybe you don't know what it is to qualify a statement.

 

As with Vitali, you can see greatness when its in front of you. Tyson could have beaten better opponents, sure, but in his prime he fought who was there and mostly ravaged them. Vitali did the same.

There's also another factor at play here.

Dominance.

Whenever there's a truly great champion, somebody that makes his opponents look like bums, people will argue they ARE bums. Seen this over and over. People don't remember Sam Peter and Shannon Briggs for laying people out cold with their huge punching power, they remember them for getting sent to hospital by Vitali Klitschko.

 

Briggs is better remembered for the fights he had in his prime, with Foreman and Lewis; not for a way-past-prime payday appearance, that took place after more than a dozen years, 25 bouts and 30lbs later.

Peter will most likely be remembered most for having Wlad in trouble and not being able to finish him off, when every other of Klit the Younger's opponents, who had him in that kind of trouble, did just that.


The the kind of dominance you are applying to Vitali is quite distinguishable from Tyson cleaning out a division of talented, prime contenders. There's really no comparison.

 

^Opinion

LOL