Who do you rank higher, Michael Spinks or Evander Holyfield?

Trick question to draw out comments about Tyson being the decider. I see what you've done here.

 

1 beat tyson twice, 1 got KOed.

Holyfield is better, beat prime Bowe, close to lewis beat tyson, mercer ect...

spinks only has holmes at heavyweight

 

Evander Holyfield.

The man's record has some real depth. Mike Tyson, Riddick Bowe, Dwight Muhammad Qawi, Michael Moorer, John Ruiz, Ray Mercer, George Foreman, Pinklon Thomas, etc. The man has been operating at a good level for a ridiculous amount of time, and instead of packing it up after his first professional loss, he came back stronger. You have to favour Holyfield's longevity, depth of resume, and achievements at both Cruiserweight and Heavyweight in this discussion. I think, anyway.

 

I disagree with this.

Michael Spinks came up against a peak Mike Tyson, and he was never a great Heavyweight anyhow. Holyfield had a much easier assignment ahead of him in '96. Non-comparable.

Likewise, Riddick Bowe was in horrible shape for the rematch. You can see that just by looking at his stomach. I don't think bowe was training properly, and you'd be hard pressed to credit Evander for overcoming Bowe at his best. He wasn't at his best.

 

Holyfield..

 

Spinks for me, so long as we're talking in a general sense rather than as Heavyweights.

 

Holy.

 

Holyfield ruled the cruisewight and heavyweight division. Beat Tyson,Holmes,Foreman,Bowe,Qawi
Holyfield is in my top 20.

 

Holyfield for me overall but Spinks is an atg based more on his light heavy career and his defeats of Holmes.

Prime Holyfield beats any version of Wlad and probably knocks him out as does Holmes.

 

Holyfield wins this by a mile. And i am very aware of Spinks... he just isn't in the same stratosphere as the real deal

 

This content is protected

&

This content is protected

.

 

I was jokiing about that.