88 TYSON v. 93 HOLYFIELD - Who Wins? - 15 rounds

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by streetsaresafer, Aug 29, 2007.


  1. nick wells jr

    nick wells jr Member Full Member

    160
    7
    May 14, 2007
  2. nick wells jr

    nick wells jr Member Full Member

    160
    7
    May 14, 2007
    who is in that handful?
     
  3. Danny

    Danny Guest

    Agree with your post mate, although I think the fight would have possibly lasted longer than your take.

    Like you say, Tyson at his best was a formidable fighting specimen. At his best, he was prepared physically & mentally, no matter what was going on around him. As Tyson stated many times during his title reign, "when it comes to business, the job has to be done nomatter what".

    Head-to-head, only a handful of past HW greats would have beaten Tyson at their best, maybe that's even extending it a bit. No matter whom Tuson would be fighting, his opponent would be in the fight of their life, and they'd know it!
     
  4. streetsaresafer

    streetsaresafer Member Full Member

    245
    8
    May 5, 2007
    I actually think Holyfield at his best was 1990 (Douglas fight)
    But the reason I put the poll based on the 93 Holyfield is that some feel that he needed the experience of losing to Bowe the 1st time in order to learn to box more rather than get into a war.

    Question for those that voted for 88 Tyson to win - would you agree that a prime Holyfield would have been his toughest fight to date?

    Either way, I think a 90 Holyfield or 93 Holyfield wins although it would be close. I just don't see Holyfield in his prime being stopped by a prime Tyson.

    Holyfield was obsessed with Tyson, that was a big part of the reason he moved up to heavyweight. He tried to get the fight with Tyson several times, starting right after the Dokes fight Holy and his team are pleading for a fight with Tyson (winner take all). They finally signed the fight in 90, but then Tyson went out and lost to Douglas. And then of course it was signed again for Nov. 8, 1991, and Tyson gets an injured rib (Elijiah Tillery's fault) and the fight is called off.

    I wonder how both men's career's would have changed had they met in 89,
    90, or 91 instead of 96? Obviously if Holyfield won, he would have gotten credibility as a great fighter and legitimate heavyweight much sooner than he did.

    And if Tyson won, his stature would be much higher because one would have to believe that even if Holyfield loses to Tyson, he would have probably made it Mike's toughest fight to date, and you'd have to think there would have been public clamor for a rematch. Holyfield also has shown throughout his career that he can come back from adversity so you would have to think he'd have been a major player in the heavyweight division, even with a loss to Tyson in 89-91.

    I guess my point is that both fighters stock would be higher had they fought somewhere between 89-91, rather than the fight we got in 96 between two formidable, but clearly past their prime fighters. Also the heavyweight division as a whole would have been that much more credible in the early 90s instead of the perception that was actually there.
     
  5. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    Without question.