How Was Holyfield Viewed As a Contender From 1988-1990?

Go watch the Foreman Holyfield fight again and tell me if he didnt engage recklessly. Check out the Cooper fight too. As far as your comment about engaging Bowe?? He wanted credit?

 

He was viewed as the 2nd best HW... but few felt he could beat Tyson at that point. Tyson was King Kong back in those days.

Looking back, I feel that Holyfield could have beat him, but very few felt that way '88-'90. Hell, he opened as a 25-1 favorite to beat Holyfield in '96, closed at 6-1.

In '91 the odds were 2-1 for Tyson.

 

Not to mention one Tony Tucker.

 

:huhTubbs was so well prepared that he forfeited a pre fight bonus, that was paid out if he came in under 235 (he weighed 238.)...

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9cdzneJb5U[/ame]

 

Incidentally Larry Merchant picked Tyrell Biggs to outpoint Mike Tyson. Tyson simply ruined him.

Ruddock was also in peak form.
Bruno was 28 when he faced Tyson.
Tucker was 29
Spinks was 31.

 

Only 'one'. Thank **** for that.

 

This is about right, slightly leaning towards 'C'. The consensus was that he simply wasn't big enough to beat Tyson- a session on the Roids saw to that. :yep

 

Because he's a fighter and nearly all of them suffer from "the bloke who I took the most clean punches off actually hit the hardest, no really, honest to God" syndrome.

 

I dont think Holyfield would ever have "engaged recklessly" (or gotten too careless) with Tyson. He always respected Tyson's aggressive style and would have always been 100% on his game and wouldn't get careless. He fully respected what Tyson was good at.

Also, in 1989-'91 Holyfield was a solid 208 - 212 pounds, and seeing how strong he was at 215 in '96, I think it's absurd to believe he was too "fragile" or "weak" for Tyson at 210 !

 

He didnt fight the same way, you should be able to acknowledge that. Holyfield slugged with everyone if they engaged him. It wasnt really until Brooks convinced him to fight Tyson a certain way after unleashing David Tua and Gary Bell on him in sparring in preparation for the Tyson fight.
I heard first hand Holyfield was getting his ass kicked by guys like Bell and another guy before Tua came in before he started listening to Brooks. Heres a quote from an article I found.
</B>Last fall, Gary Bell had doubts about Evander Holyfield's ability to defeat Mike Tyson and win the World Boxing Association heavyweight championship.
Bell, Holyfield's chief sparring partner, had his way with Holyfield in the early days of preparing for the Nov. 9 bout with Tyson.
As camp wore on, though, Holyfield improved, and Bell became a convert.
"When we got out here (to Las Vegas), I had no doubt he would win," he said.
And he was right. Holyfield, who opened as a 25-1 underdog in that first fight, scored one of the biggest upsets in recent boxing history when he stopped Tyson in the 11th round, setting up Saturday's rematch at the MGM.

I dont think Holyfield would have fought Tyson the same way without Brooks in charge, in fact Im sure of it.

 

Heres some more even though it was Brooks who was in charge for Tyson..

Well, if Turner's strategy was to scare the living daylights out of Holyfield, it worked, all right. Bell was told to charge furiously at Holyfield, right from the opening bell, which is exactly what Tyson would do.
He would throw left uppercuts to the body -- Tyson's favorite punch -- for 30 seconds straight, and then they would stop and simulate it all over again.
They were preparing Holyfield for the first round, but, in the meantime, he almost did not make it there.
''I did almost quit right then,'' Holyfield said today. ''Well, I mean, you have to convince yourself you're ready.
''Having a guy like Gary Bell, as tough as he is, put a lot of pressure on me each and every day, it was awful. It's not like it was one day and that's it.
''I mean, the guy is young, and he's got a young body, and is aggressive. And you get frustrated. You're thinking, 'I'm sparring a guy who's 25 years old, and he don't have much skills, and he's doing all of this to me, oh no.'
''And then I'm supposed to fight a guy supposedly a lot better? Tyson?''
If that was not fear, nothing was. But it was also the nudge that Holyfield needed, because just as he was about to turn in his locker room key, he thought of Cecil Collins.
''I'll never forget it,'' Holyfield said. ''I got my early experience at 11 years old. I got beat by a guy named Cecil Collins. Cecil Collins was a little white kid, and he was cross-eyed, and I was a little bigger than him, and I thought I'd beat him because I was black and he was white, and because I was just bigger. And he beat me twice. And I beat him the third time. And it's amazing, that one win overwhelmed two.

 

Yep, Tubbs sure was in top shape!:good

 

The big issue is always that Tyson stopped doing things. And give him a get out of jail free card because of it. If he stopped doing things, it's a weakness in his game.

What makes everyone think the other guy hasn't changed either? Evander didn't throw as many long extended combos he used to when he was cruiser champ. He wasn't quite as accurate. He didn't mix in his uppercuts as well. But what he did do was compensate and go to other things to improve his game and continue winning.

Fighters do have the ability to change. One guy did it and the other didn't. That's always an important part of evaluating a fight just like the other factors. the trouble is, most folks look strictly at punching power to determine outcomes. But you have to be able to land. And not get hit in return.

And whenever looking at the frontrunners, once the opponent doesn't cooperate and make himself a willing victim, flaws surface. And magnify as rounds go on. The frontrunner doesn't do anything different and now all of a sudden it's him having to absorb punches instead of just dishing out. And all of a sudden they look bad when its the 8th round and they're falling for feints. Balance looks bad & so on. It's all part of the sport.