Holmes 7 year reign or Holyfield 4 HW titles - what's more impressive?

Thats bull****, he beat Douglas for the unified titles, lost them to bowe won them back from bowe then lost them to Moorer in a fight I had Holyfield winning by a point, then the titles went to **** they were all stripped and Tyson got back in the mix and he was seemingly the champ, Holyfield whipped Tyson to win it for a fair legit third time.

So in all honestly your considering Holyfield a 2 time champion is just pathetic. a 4 time champ is questionable no doubt, Lewis was stripped and Holyfield barely got past Ruiz but he did, However considering the circumstances of which how the WBA title was taken the only thing you can really question is his 4 time status.

Which I really dont question neither, Why? becuase Lewis was supposed to defend against Ruiz chose not to there for the rules were followed. Making Holyfield a true three time hw champion but also a 4 time belt holder.

 

Firsst one was 10-2 or 11-1 for Lennox.

The second one was 8-4.

Tyson himself said his heart wasn't in the fight game after 1990.

He wasn't one of the 20 best heavyweights ever. he was seriously frightened of Lewis.

This statement qualifies as post of the month, in some quarters !



Foreman was in his forties and gave Holy all he could handle.

The twenty years earlier version would have taken out Holy in two rounds or less

The only absurd thing here is even comparing Holy's heavyweight opponents with those of Holmes.

Holme's heavyweight championship resume is FAR superior to that of Holyfield, both in terms of the quality of the opposition and , more importantly, in terms of his winning percentage while defending his title.

Head to head and prime for prime, Holy would be in for an embarrassment .

 

I'm one of the bigger Holyfield fans around here, and I would say it's a stretch to rate him above Holmes. Both are top ten ATGs, and Holyfield was the best HW since Holmes. But better than Holmes? No.

 

Bias ?

I actually followed both careers as they unfolded.

From Holmes' days as a sparring partner for the bug guys to Holy's recent snoozebout with the Russian giant.

And overall, the level of talent in the HW division was quite a bit better in the seventies and early eighties than it was in the nineties.


As for bias, i already told you what I thought of Holmes.

Here's a recent post from another thread

 

We'll agree to hold different views here.

Happy New year.:good

 

I'll go with Larry Holmes..... Holmes fought tough competition during his reign... I get pissed when folks say that Holmes beat a bunch of pussies' and all......... Dudes, like "Norton, Weaver, Shavers, LeDoux, Leon Spinks, Berbick, Snipes, Cooney, Tex Cobb, Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith & Carl Williams" were not "Gimmie" type of opponents..... And, in truth, most people know that Larry Holmes really beat Michael Spinks in the '86 rematch.... Larry Holmes was great.......:bbbdeal

MR.BILL

 

Plus, what is impressive about Larry Holmes' title reign is, he was seemingly at odds much of the time with his promoter Don King...... And we all know that Larry Holmes was not a popular champion with the fans during his title reign, also..... Larry Holmes had to deal with several KEY obstacles from 1978 thru 1985..... Peace.....

MR.BILL

 

:good

 

I still enjoy reviewing my 2002 tape of "Holmes-Butterbean" every now and then.... Larry Holmes was soft at 254 pounds, but he still had a jab and decent right cross...... Holmes was age 53 and in the ring.....

MR.BILL

Note:

I miss the USA Tuesday night fights / mismatches, etc..... ESPN 2 sucks..... Versus is also weak...... FSN is cool with John Scully and Chris Byrd and all, but they are too inconsistant with their fight schedule..... Peace......

 

Since about 90% of the posters thinks Holmes has had the far more impressive HW career, applying Ockham's razor suggest that your position is the biased one.

Have you considered this possibility?

 

Holy's resume is great..... No doubt there....... However, I just get pissed when people fail to see Larry Holmes' pro record as also being a great one..... People seem to judge Larry Holmes based on his 1970s / 80s personality...... Yes, he was bitter back then.... BUT! He was still a great tactical boxer with a damn good punch.....

MR.BILL

 

Larry Holmes lost a 12 rd. decision to Evander Holyfield in 1992.... Larry Holmes was 42 and Holy was age 29..... 13 years is a big gap in sports competition.... Still, Larry fought Evander on fairly even terms throughout the bout.... The fight itself was NOT great, but the event was interesting in itself..... Could a prime Holy have handled a 1980 version of Larry Holmes in the ring? I don't think so..... Prime-4-prime, Holmes was the better fighter......... PLUS! Larry Holmes always appeared NATURALLY trained....... Holy's methods are in serious question these days......

MR.BILL

 

If you consider linear HW title, then the only one 3-time HW champ is Ali (Holy and Lennox are 2-time linear champions). But honestly, did you consider Briggs as HW World champion back in 1997-1998? So do you think neither Evander nor Lennox were champions at the end of 1997? It's strange:huh