Am I the only one who just can't watch George in his prime?

I think it's worth noting that Byrd and Ruiz are actually more accomplished outside their fights with Holyfield than the guys who beat him in his supposed prime.

Byrd has wins over Tua and Vitali which are better than anything Bowe did outside the Holyfield trilogy by my reckoning while Ruiz beat Johnson, Rahman, and Oquendo which again seems better than Moorers wins outside Holyfield

 

As far as being world class at age 40 goes Vitali Klitschko was still considered the second best heavyweight at age 40 and Wladimir at age 41 certainly still looked to be a top 10 heavyweight. So that's not unique to Holmes and Foreman

 

Refresh my memory. Which Klitschko regained their championship at age 45?

 

Bowe's resume isn't great, but even without Holyfield it's better than Byrd or Ruiz's.

The 38 year old Holyfield that lost to Ruiz and especially the 40 year old Holyfield that lost to Byrd, was clearly past prime.

 

I don't see anyone on Bowes resume outside Holyfield as being as good as Tua and Vitali both of whom Byrd beat. If you take Holyfield out of both their resumes I think Byrd has the better accomplishments

 

This thread is about him in his prime. The older George was a completely different fighter who happened to use a few of the young guy's techniques (mainly the pushing and guard manipulation).

 

In addition to Holyfield x 2, Bowe beat Golata x 2 (valid if you're including Vitali for Byrd), Pinklon Thomas, Tubbs, Biggs, Dokes, Seldon, Hide, Coetzer, Cooper, Donald and Gonzalez.

Even forgetting their respective wins over Holyfield (Bowe x 2 vs prime, Byrd x 1 vs shot), Bowe's 12th best win is considerably better than Byrd's 7th best. His win resume is substantially deeper. Which is why everyone ranks him higher than Byrd at HW.

Who do you think was better, Bowe, Byrd or Ruiz?

Do you think the 40 year old Holyfield was prime vs Byrd?

 

Eh. I'm not sure that old George and old Larry proved anything about their own prime eras so much as showing that ATG's who haven't been brain-damaged and who are in good physical health can still give young guys a run for their money deep into their 40s. Archie Moore did the same thing long before they did it. Bernard Hopkins did the same thing shortly after they did it.

Tyson could have done it had he the dedication and focus. If they had been there, he easily could have hung around for a decade more than he did, pasting journeymen and B level fighters left and right, pulling off an upset here or there.

 

That you came up with two other names through the history of boxing shows it's a pretty rare thing, But, yes, it indicates that the eras they reached their prime in can't really have been worse than the ones they competed in toward the end of their careers. Which was my point.