Where is Holyfield on your ATG Heavyweight list?

1. You don't have to scream

2. You're wrong about him only being a two time.. He was recognized as " the man upon beating Mike Tyson in 1996, for two thirds of the crown, making him a 3 time lineal champion. The other two occasions were addmitadly alphabet fragments, but for whatever its worth, it is still a recod no one else holds, and certainly not Bowe..[/quote]


IF "IT TURNS OUT THEY CAN'T"???? When the hell are we ever going to find that out???!!!

Legacies are the only things that can be tangibly looked at?? Well I've looked at the first Holyfield-Bowe fight many times?? And both the Liston-Patterson fights:rofl

Liston's isn't better in some respects - Patterson had two MUCH better fights against Ali than Liston - he also beat whatever anybody else says, Quarry (twice), Ellis, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Johannson (twice), Machen, Moore, Durrelle, Maxim - Liston didn't "clean out the divison" - he simply mopped up Archie Moore's leftovers such as washed up Nino Valdes, Bert Whitehurst, Howard King, Besmanoff - Folley wouldn't have beaten Patterson he couldn't even beat Henry Cooper, and Patterson proved he could beat Machen and Harris - the only name that stands up is Cleveland Williams which is fair enough but - one genuine name is not enough for saying someone "cleaned out a division".

No one will take you seriously after saying Holyfield looked like sh1t leading up to the Bowe fights - and then claiming you didn't say it??? Especially when you then said the 1991 was his prime year - erm wasn't that in the lead up to Bowe I??

Holy was not considered the man after beating Tyson at all!! atsch Everyone I know thought the exact opposite actually

 

How can Bowe at his best beating Holyfield at his best - leave Bowe being rated below Holyfield??? And how can a young prime Golota losing twice against a dissapated out of shape Bowe leave Golota being rated above Bowe???? atsch Is everyone going mad here or is it me??? Oh yeah that right winning makes you worse and losing makes you better!!! That must be where I've been going wrong all these years - cheers for clearing that up for me :good

 

IF "IT TURNS OUT THEY CAN'T"???? When the hell are we ever going to find that out???!!!

Legacies are the only things that can be tangibly looked at?? Well I've looked at the first Holyfield-Bowe fight many times?? And both the Liston-Patterson fights:rofl

Liston's isn't better in some respects - Patterson had two MUCH better fights against Ali than Liston - he also beat whatever anybody else says, Quarry (twice), Ellis, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Johannson (twice), Machen, Moore, Durrelle, Maxim - Liston didn't "clean out the divison" - he simply mopped up Archie Moore's leftovers such as washed up Nino Valdes, Bert Whitehurst, Howard King, Besmanoff - Folley wouldn't have beaten Patterson he couldn't even beat Henry Cooper, and Patterson proved he could beat Machen and Harris - the only name that stands up is Cleveland Williams which is fair enough but - one genuine name is not enough for saying someone "cleaned out a division".

No one will take you seriously after saying Holyfield looked like sh1t leading up to the Bowe fights - and then claiming you didn't say it??? Especially when you then said the 1991 was his prime year - erm wasn't that in the lead up to Bowe I??

Holy was not considered the man after beating Tyson at all!! atsch Everyone I know thought the exact opposite actually[/QUOTE]

You and those you knew were in a huge minority. Holyfield was the boss at heavyweight after that win, and most every fan, writer, and official thought so.

Holyfield didn't look great. He went life and death with Bert Cooper just before Bowe. Bert Cooper was not a world class heavyweight. He didn't belong in there with Holyfield, and nearly knocked him into the 5th row. Rock Newman, Bowe's manager, watched this fight and says it was the one that convinced him that Holyfield was ready to be dethroned.

Just because you lose a fight to a guy doesn't mean he has a better resume. Holyfields resume is very much superior to Bowe. Holyfield 1 is Bowe's best win. Holyfield himself has a win over Bowe, 2 wins over Tyson, a win over George Foreman, a win over Buster Douglas, a win over Larry Holmes, a win over Ray Mercer, a win(Some would say 2) over Michael Moorer, a win over Hasim Rahman, it goes on.

Bowe had Holyfield 1 and 3. He had two W's over Golota, but while talented, Golota also didn't achieve very much.

Holyfield fought Lewis. Bowe chose not too.

Holyfield got the worst of 3 fights with Bowe, but Bowe is the one who deterriorated after that fight to dramatic effect. Evander schooled Valuev over there at 47, Riddick was shot to **** at 29.

I can't even see you're argument man, its just asinine.

 

IMO Liston had a good run from 1959 to 1960 but its hardly a "generation of contenders", none were unbeaten and not all were ranked, just 2 years of top opposition. in 1961' liston fought only the unrated howard king and westphal. then liston went 2-2 in 4years...
some excelent points however about other dominant champs.:good

 

Holyfield is a tough guy to rate but there is no doubt he is in my top ten .. his heart, physical gifts and his exceptional chin make him a miserable match up for most ...

 

No you were in the minority mate - everyone I knew at the time were all saying - Tyson wasn't really the man who beat the man anyway - so Holy can't be considered the man?? Most journalists I was reading at the time were of the same opinion aswell?? And the officials who crowned George Foreman obviously didn't think so especially after he beat (Moorer) the man who beat Holyfield?? You are either too young to properly remember or you were in some strange parralel dimension where Holyfield never lost his title

Yeah whats your point about the Cooper stuff??? It was Magoo who said that was his prime period - I was arguing that it wasn't??? Think you've got the wrong man on that one :huh

Sorry had to copy this bit just so I could beleive it

Just because you lose a fight to a guy doesn't mean he has a better resume. Holyfields resume is very much superior to Bowe. Holyfield 1 is Bowe's best win. Holyfield himself has a win over Bowe, 2 wins over Tyson, a win over George Foreman, a win over Buster Douglas, a win over Larry Holmes, a win over Ray Mercer, a win(Some would say 2) over Michael Moorer, a win over Hasim Rahman, it goes on.

Holyfield has a win over a totally out of shape Bowe, 2 wins over an anchient (in boxing terms) Tyson, a win over a grossly out of shape and extremely old and barely able to stand straight Foreman, a win?? over a horrendously out of shape and disgraceful quitter (take the money and dive) Buster, a win over a horrendously out of shape an ver very old Holmes minus his contact lenses, a win over a flabbier and much less impressive Moorer, and a win over Rahman with the use of his head in a disgracefully blatant manner to the point where Rahman had a lump the size of a brick developing on his head - for which Holyfield should've been disqualified atsch

Holyfield fought Lewis???? And what happened he got whooped big time twice!! And Bowe didn't duck Lewis - that was Rock Newman trying to cash in for a bit before taking a risky fight - did Bowe look like he was scared of Lewis after the first Holyfield fight at ringside??

Yes Bowe deteriorated but so did Ali - much worse but nobody lets it cloud the fact that at his best there were few better????

And don't even tell me that Holyfield didn't deteriorate after the Bowe fights!!!! You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think he didn't - and touting the Valuev fight as any great thing is a joke - Valuev is one of the biggest jokes in heavyweight history lets face it

 

Your bias clouds you man. So, I'll respond succintly: Holyfield was the man, the #1 heavyweight, not the linear champ. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_1996
Look up 1997 too. You'll see Holyfield at #1 as well. You be wrong.
There. I've back up my claim. Lets see your evidence. Find me a credible source that has Holyfield not #1.

I'm 45 years old.

Holyfield won the title from Douglas in the third round. Discredit it all you want, it happened.

Doesn't matter what magoo said. Holyfield wasn't peak when Bowe beat him.

He beat an out of shape Bowe, but that wasn't a prime Holyfield.

Had hepatitis when he lost to Bowe again.

Tyson was a world champion. Doesn't matter how ancient hindsight you think he was. He had the WBC belt. End of.

Foreman went on to beat Moorer and win the heavyweight title. By knockout. He was more than able to stand up.

Holmes went on the have a successful comeback and nearly win a title belt twice.

Again with revisionist history. Take away the Rahman win by saying what the referee should have done. Well, he didn't DQ Holyfield, and Rahman was way behind on the cards when he developed his tumor. Well, I'm gonna say the referee should have called a TKO victory for Golota before the DQ happened, as he was whupping Bowe so badly. Works both ways. I can take Bowe's resume apart if I'm allowed to say what I think the referee or judges should have done. He threw a ton of low blows in the first Holyfield fight. About 20-30. Should he have been DQed, or is it a fight?

He sure looked questionable tossing his title into a garbage can. Holyfield fought him, Bowe avoided him. He gets props for stepping the hell up, Bowe gets due criticism for missing out on the most relevant, meaningful fight of his career. If you reverse that logic, it benefits champions more to hold their title hostage against weak opponents for a long, meaningless reign.

Ali had almost a decade more longevity than Bowe. You're argument doesnt even make sense. Bowe's prime was short-He was ruined by 3 fights. Holyfield was far from ruined, as he had TONS more success after Bowe 3 than Bowe had in his whole career.

Beating any titlist at 47 is an impressive thing. Holyfield beat Valuev easier than did Haye. Lets put Bowe in the ring with Haye or one of the Klitschkos. See how he does.

 

I could easily pick apart this lame post, but once again you ignored half the points that I've made, while also making some uninformed statements....So why bother doing the leg work if you won't? You seriously need to educate yourself on the classics, because as of right now, you're in the minority, and frankly I don't see you leaving that level any time soon....

 

I think its reasonable to say, that by the time he fought Patterson, there was basically no one left to fight......Period......

 

[/QUOTE]
This whole post ( if that's what you want to call it ) has more holes in it than swiss cheese.... Probably the worst trolling effort I've ever seen, if its even worth being called that....

 

"Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeegrant......I will be seeing you, real soon. IN HELL!"

This content is protected

 

I sure as **** do.....:good

MR.BILL

 

VK is not only huge... he is extremely strong, he punches very hard with either hand and carries his power in the late rounds, he's very durable (never knocked down btw), has good stamina, decent speed (especially for a man of his size), a good workrate, he knows how to use his size, and he doesn't take too many chances (he's pretty careful)... what more do you need?

He may not be pretty to watch but he is effective

 

This whole post ( if that's what you want to call it ) has more holes in it than swiss cheese.... Probably the worst trolling effort I've ever seen, if its even worth being called that....[/quote]

You're a d1ck mate - you can't actually argue any of my points that i raise with you so you just resort to lame insults - pretty much sums up your mentality really

 

I was ignoring half your points!!!!???? Go back and check the point I was making was breaking down your posts and answering each point you made step by step so you'll see if you look again that I did answer each point - I quite enjoyed it actually - it's always fun putting Boxrec fools like you to the sword of reality