Yes. Two. Marciano and Charles. I'd only pick one of Holyfield's opponents to beat Louis: Lennox. Holyfield's opponents were better. But Holyfield himself wasn't.
If Holyfield had better opponents and has wins over those opponents how is he not at least on their level?
Idk I really don’t see how Louis is better, I think it’s just his exciting style that makes him seem more impressive
Surely Holyfield's even more entertaining style would make him seem more impressive? I don't know how you can't see an argument for Louis being better. He speaks for himself IMO.
I don’t see how you can’t see the argument for Holyfield being better, guess neither side is gonna budge
I can see it. I just don't buy it. I think it hinges on his toughness and foot-speed. I don't think that's enough to make up for all of Louis' advantages.
I can see exactly where this is going. I'll list the catagories I think Louis is better in, you'll disagree and say so. Nothing will come of it, aside from maybe getting derailed into tit-for-tat debate which means basically nothing in relation to the thread title. There isn't much point.
it's like alot of people become crazy on these forums they know from video they dont see boxers from Joe's era and think he really can beat Lewis or even people from 70s era they like to pretend to be blind and crazy well not pretend to be crazy its fact it looks like
