Tyson Above Holyfield - Can It Be Justified?

If you go by dominance, Tyson was greater.. If you go by head to head then Holyfield was. I would say Holyfield is greater.

 

you cant say that about all of them. tyson crushed bruno twice while bruno gave lewis hell for 7rds

 

Lewis also fought most of Tyson former opponents like biggs and Tucker for instance when they were shot. We seen when Biggs and Lewis fought when they were young, Biggs outboxed him. Tyson fought all of those guys at the peak of their careers, Lewis and Holyfield didn't. Hell even Tyson fought a much better Holmes than Holyfield did.

 

Of course you can justify it... as you can vice versa.

I rank Tyson a good bit over Holyfield at HW, p4p is a lot closer.

 

Paul Pender got the better of Ray Robinson but I know who Id bet on H2H.... timing is important in boxing (any sport actually)

 

Bull****. The Holmes Holyfield fought was better than the one Tyson fought. He was back in his routine and didn't come off a long layoff and a short preperation time.
Also, neither Biggs nor Tucker were shot when Lewis fought them. Get your facts straight. :deal

 

No, you need to get your facts staright. Tony Tucker was 15Ibs. heavier when he fought Lennox Lewis and he came off a 2 yr. retirement and he was coming off drugs. Tyrell Biggs was never the same after Tyson fought him, he was shot fighter and gun shy after that fight. Tyrell biggs and Tucker were shot to **** when Lewis got them.

And if you honestly think Larry Holmes was better for the Holyfield fight when he was 4yrs. older in HIS 40'S, AND 10 PDS. HEAVIER YOU MIGHT JUST BE HALF ****IN ******ED.

 

Repeating wrongs does not make them right

 

Well a huge factor in the Lewis/Tucker fight that doesn't get mentioned is a guy facing a Don King fighter in a WBC title bout. You can count on your thumbs the guys that came out of those hostile waters with a W. What you see instead is a guy not signing to fight the King fighter.

Biggs was just an opponent at that stage of the game and more along the lines of providing American viewers a chance to see Lewis in action. Very few people at the time were sending away for those early Lewis fights & if you did you knew Biggs had zero chance. Since so few people had seen any Lewis bouts, they thought Biggs had a shot & a lot of that was due to the amateur victory.

 

Sure, although I'm not sure I do ... Holyfield defeated a past prime Tyson who lost more game than a diminished Evander had lost ...

See how many rate Pep over Saddler ...

 

I think tyson at his peak was better. once Don King got with him, he turned into a hired gun. He was a really good fight at one point.

 

That's why Tyson was such a huge favourite over Holyfield :good

 

You are wrong, Canibus81 is right. :deal

 

thats because people were convinced tyson was his old self but not realizing that his comeback was designed for him to look good. guys like mcneely, bruno, mathis and seldon were stiffs lined for tyson to feast on. so after knocking them out, people thought, hes back. while holyfield was koed by bowe and lost moorer. but fact is, those 4 guys make bowe and moorer look like atgs.( well, bruno was decent)

 

I agree. And Tyson didn't look no where near his old self in the 2nd Bruno fight. Only thing that looked good was the knockout, that was a vintage Tyson knockout. Other than that he was slower, with less headmovement and was throwing only one punch at a time. People were going more into the image of Mike Tyson, than the actual great fighter that he used to be.