190 lb Holyfield vs Oscar Bonavena

You can't gauge them on their ability to win fights if the only question your asking yourself is "What are their signature wins?"

 

OK, which of his wins impressed you? Because he seemed maybe somewhat less effective from that perspective than (say) Joe Bugner, who also made Frazier and(to a lesser extent Ali) look bad.

 

I think Holyfield beats Bonavena but that signature win stuff is rubbish.
What was alis signature win before Liston?
What was Fraziers signature win before he beat ali?
What was Nortons signature win before he beat Ali?
Foremans signature win before he beat Frazier?
What was Douglas signature win before Tyson?
What was Bowes signature win before Holyfield?

Based on the signature win criteria none of the outcomes above should have been possible

 

Jesus, you don't get it. You have to look at ALL of his fights to gauge a fighter.

Which of 190 lb Holyfields wins over heavyweights impressed you?

 

But we have a whole career to judge bonavena on. He isn't a 22 year old Ali against Liston. At no point did he manage to beat any one as good as Holyfield, so why assume that he could?

 

I can give you lots of Holyfield wins which impressed me. obsviously, when he was fighting heavyweights he didn't cut to 190.

What do you see in bonavena that he was in holyfields class as a fighter?

 

Why does Bonavena have to have impressive wins to beat a 190 lb Holyfield but 190 lb Holyfield doesn't have to have impressive wins over heavyweights? You should be looking at this on both sides of the equation rather than just one side.

Bonavena nearly beat Frazier and gave Ali lots of trouble. Cruiserweight Holy wasn't yet the world beater that he would later become. Even at his early days at heavyweight he was shaken up pretty bad by Cooper.

 

What did you see in all of Buster Douglas's previous fights that would have led you to believe that he could've beaten Mike Tyson?

 

**** happens in boxing sometimes... irrespective of a fighter's record and prior performances.

 

Like i said i would put my money on Holyfield. But again....the signature win is just an arbitrary made up term. By people who think that boxing works like a math equation where you need variable X or Y to win a fight. Sometimes guys who have bad resumees and no signature wins beat proven champions and sometimes someone who quit manages to find it within himself to rise to an occasion.


If you are going to pick holyfield then pick him because Bonavena doesnt bring anything in terms of attributes to the table that holyfield couldnt deal with. He beat bigger stronger harder punching faster taller more technical guys than bonavena, thats why i pick him.
Even at cruiserweight Holyfield would be at most 3 or 5 pounds lighter in the ring than he was in 92 against Bowe. He simply wouldnt dry out

 

Holyfield had some learning to do once he got to heavyweight. That's really the biggest factor here. If it were prime Holyfield I don't even think it would be close in favor of Holyfield but then again Bonavena was just one of those fighters

 

Right, but looking back at their careers knowing what we know now, it is clear that Ali was by far a better fighter than Liston.

Similarly, looking back at the careers of Holyfield and Bonavena, it is clear that Holyfield was by far the better fighter and should have won.

We aren't being asked to say "How we would have picked the fight if we had no information on Holy post 1988?". We are being "How would we have picked the fight?" Holyfield's later career showed that he was a great fighter, Bonavena not so much.