Holyfield vs Lewis 1994

Prime Holyfield would beat any version of Lewis.
If 37 past prime Holyfield gave him helluva fight, Holyfield from 2nd Bowe fight would beat Lewis.

 

Personally I view Lewis as somewhat overrated.
Yes he belongs in the top ten ATG heavyweights. But not because of his skill level but because of his size. His skill set was average. Maybe Slightly above. His size and atheletiscim separates him from most boxers that came before him.
Think about a few of the best opponents he faced early in his career and where they were when he faced them.
Bruno, Ruddock, Mercer, Biggs and Tucker. Bruno ,Ruddock, Biggs and Tucker were much fresher when they were beaten by Mike Tyson and were beaten just as convincingly if not more so by him.
Ray Mercer was practically schooled by Larry Holmes in his forties yet , Lewis struggled with him four or five years later.
Holyfield was over the hill, and getting deep in the valley by the time he faced Lewis. While most boxing fans feel Lewis won both fights. My question is always why did it take two fights?
If Lewis was truly a great fighter it shouldn't have taken two fights for him to get a convincing win over Holyfield at that point in his career.
Then the ko losses to opponents that no one would remember if they had not K'oed him from
McCall and Rahman. Sure he got his revenge.
But he didn't learn his lesson after the first one as Joe Louis did. So it seems more of a flaw than a fluke.
At heavyweight prime vs prime, I believe Holyfield beats Lewis by UD.
Holyfields activity, and movement would make Lewis reluctant to let his hands go. He'd fight defensively until it was too late.

 

It took him two fights simply because he got blatantly robbed. Fan cards on EOTR average out at 10 rounds to 2. A second fight should never have been needed but......it was very lucrative.......

It's like asking why it took Whitaker two goes to beat Ramirez. Because he got robbed just like Lewis.

The two occurrences were completely different. He was a technically flawed loose fighter when beaten by McCall. He was in good shape. Against Rahman 7 years it's common knowledge he dogged it in training and he turned up at altitude late - the dates are certified. Hopkins suffered in a similar way. While Lewis was filming for a movie and arriving 12 days out Rahman had turned up 2 weeks earlier giving him double the time to get adjusted. Lewis paid the price. It's also fair to say he'd gotten a bit complacent and arrogant.

Louis actually learned two lessons in one whupping. He couldn't stop right hands and he had also switched off in training preferring golf and smoo.

 

Lewis didn’t take two attempts to beat Holyfield - he clearly & decisively won their first bout. The “draw” was scandalous. But then we come to the rematch, with a clearly past it Holyfield, & Lewis has a life & death struggle - which leads me to the part of your post I agree with…

Lewis is over-rated.

 

The problem with Holyfield us that he was extremely inconsistence ................around that time frame he almost got ko'ed by C level Bert Cooper , went 24 with two Fossils and was beaten from pillar to post by a green Bowe.

 

Here's the issue i have when people bring up Holyfield's prime at Heavyweight.

Holyfield wasn't exactly consistent at Heavyweight he looked very beatable vs an old Holmes, Cooper, Stewart, Dokes, looking at those fights which is considered Holyfield's prime in the early 90s does he beat Lewis based on those fights ?

You could argue Holyfield in 1996 right up to the Lewis fight was having the best run of performances of his career at Heavyweight, he beat Mike Tyson and also destroyed Michael Moorer knocking him down half a dozen times.

Some could also say Holyfield was too gung ho in the early 90s which is considered his prime, and actually become a smarter fighter in the latter part of the 90s.

Whilst Holyfield was probably a bit fresher and more energetic in the early 90s, on the flipside he was smarter fighter in the late 90s.

 

Excellent post DP, I couldn't agree more.

 

100% agree

 

Lewis beat Holyfield easily both times. Saying that the rematch was close is a revisionism. Evander put up a better fight in the rematch, but it wasn't enough. Lewis controlled it from start to finish. The most you can give Holyfield is 4 rounds. Nobody ever hit me with a compelling argument for 5, let alone a draw.

 

Holyfield wins a competitive decision if hes the same as in the Bowe rematch.

 

LOL that means easily? Then McCall and Rahman absolutely demolished Lewis

 

Holyfield wasn’t healthy in 1994, hence his temporary departure from the sport

 

Well, they did, lol. But after that Lewis demolished Rahman even worse and beat McCall in the rematch.

 

Another factor seldom mentioned or acknowledged is Lewis' training for the rematch. He dominated the guy A to Z in the first fight. Why would he get in razor sharp condition again for the rematch?

Guys only get in razor sharp condition minimal times in their career. They need to learn how to get in good shape and get the W. Guys like Holmes and Ali and Holyfield were terrific at this. Get razor sharp for the big & toughest matches. This is why these guys have so many flatter efforts aginst softer opponents. But they knew how to get the win.

Me....I never thought for a moment going into that rematch Lennox was going to be in the same condition. Not happening. Figured Commander Vander to be better but not good enough to get the win. And he is always going to eat jabs and punches from a Lewis fight. And always have a tough time penetrating the Lewis defense--which was always underrated. He was not a guy all that easy to hit. Especially for a combo puncher like Evander. Very tough guy to land combos on.

The other huge factor in all of this was the promoters---just when was the DKP guy getting screwed on the scorecards?

How are things scored if Lennox had been the DKP moneymaker and cash cow?