All things considered which was the better win?

Is this even a serious question?

Tyson KO4 Holmes

Unless you want to argue otherwise.

 

Tyson's win is better, it's not even close. A better question would be which win is better, Holyfield's over Foreman or over Holmes.

 

holyfields win was not only a better win it was a fight that is one of the most entertaining fight of all time it was a brawl from start to finish:yep:think

 

Tyson's win is a better win.

Larry Holmes actually said BEFORE AND AFTER the fight that the fact that he was coming a layoff actually HELPED him. He said he would have fared worse had he fought Tyson straight after losing 2 controversial fights to Spinks.


However, as I am a HUGE fan of Holyfield, I give him a lot of credit for standing up and brawling with Foreman, even if it was Old George. It was a great win nonetheless.

 

Interesting after some of the comments in this thread: Better Victory: Marciano over Moore or Tyson over Holmes?

Relevant thread, I think to this one.

 

Holyfield's win over Foreman was better. Foreman was on a mission, and there to win.

Holmes was coming straight off a 21-month layoff when he fought Tyson. Even Holmes admits he was scared, and wasn't ready, and in truth he was only there for the money.

 

Probably both true.

 

I'd say tyson over Holmes. Both wins were expected,but I make my choice because of the very manner of the victory. Holmes was totally slaughtered. Foreman managed to put up quite a competitive scrap against Holyfield.

 

About level,I'd say. Both veterans gave Holyfield a decent fight,although they were way behind on the cards.

 

Tyson's win and isn't remotely close, Holmes was arguably unbeaten, Foreman was C Class and slow as mollasses in his comeback and would lose to Tommy Morrison

 

No, Holmes was not arguably unbeaten, unless you want to accept arguments that Foreman received a quick count against Ali and was robbed against Jimmy Young too. The first Holmes-Spinks fight was a clear Spinks win, and the second was no more disputable than Holmes' wins over Williams and Witherspoon.
A more reasonably argument is that Homes had lost 2 of his last 3, before a long layoff and official retirement.

It's pure revisionism to build up '88 Holmes as anything other than a rusty old has-been being led to the slaughter.
Foreman at least was an active fighter going in to his match with Holyfield.

 

Tyson KO4 Holmes > Holyfield UD12 Foreman
If you look at Holmes career after the fight. Than you can't blame his age for the result. Tyson was able to stop Holmes which no one else has been able to do. The Holmes who lost to Tyson was a bettter heavyweight than the Foreman who lost to Holyfield.

 

Five voted for Holyfield-Foreman. Wtf?

I thought the thread was a wind-up, but obviously...