All-time great fighters without a top 100 prime P4P fighter on their resume?

Sure I just think Usyk as a fighter is much more impressive and skilled then Holyfield and wouldn't have had his losses if he fought his competition whereas I think Holyfield would have lost at least once to the fighters Usyk beat.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if Breidis or Fury were able to beat Holyfield. Not saying they would but I think those 2 in particular would be problematic for Holyfield.

 

Exactly and Usyk would beat both Bowe and Moorer (imagine saying a small heavyweight with a glass chin would be Usyk's toughest fight like actual absurd take)

 

36 year old Fury coming off arguably losing to an MMA fighter is not beating a prime Holyfield.

And Briedis who gets a bit overrated on this forum is certainly not beating a prime Holyfield at Cruiserweight.

Moorer is also not a small Heavyweight he weighed 223 pounds vs Holyfield in their rematch and is near enough identical to Usyk in dimensions and weight.

And there's a considerable amount of opponents on Holyfield’s resume that would trouble Usyk ?

Forgetting hypothetical fantasy match ups Holyfield has the better resume more world title wins and more wins vs top 10 ranked fighters hence he should rate higher than Usyk as it stands today.

 

I have no problem with you rating Holyfield higher depends on the criteria. I guess the hypotheticals are sort of useless since we won't ever be able to prove it but when we talked about prime versions of fighters it was kinda expected we would arrive there.

 

Well in all the important criterias Holyfield rates above Usyk.

More notable names.

More wins vs ranked fighters.

More world title wins.

Usyk has the undefeated record but he's also only had 23 professional fights. He's achieved a considerable amount in those 23 professional fights don't get me wrong but I don't think he rates above Holyfield as it stands today.

If Usyk wins 2 more significant Heavyweight fights against top ranked contenders then he has a strong case but for now no IMO.

 

Since you're clearly responding to me while pretending you’re not, let me respond (even though we both know you’ll run off and ghost the thread like the whining coward you are.)

Holyfield struggled with skilled boxers, and Fury is one of the best at controlling range, countering, and shutting down the inside game with clinches. He gave Usyk trouble, and Usyk is a better technician than Holyfield ever was. But yeah, the same guy who got pushed by a 42-year-old Holmes is just gonna walk through a good version of Fury? That’s pure fanfiction. You look at results like they’re gospel but have zero eye for what's happening in the ring. You don’t understand styles or tactics just scores.

And says who about Briedis? He pushed two all-time great cruiserweights—guys on Holyfield’s level if not better—to the edge. He’s proven he’s elite. But since your analysis begins and ends at BoxRec, I wouldn’t expect any real breakdown from you. Just another “result = good” post with zero substance.

Funny how you bring up the rematch with Moorer, where he was clearly out of shape at 223, as if that was prime Moorer. When he actually beat Holyfield, he was 214—much closer to the version of Usyk who’s bigger, smarter, tougher, and just better in every department. Moorer beat Holyfield; Usyk would beat Moorer easily, grind him down, and stop him. It wouldn’t even be one of Usyk’s harder fights compared to Fury, Briedis, Gassiev, or Joshua. But keep making things up—you’re great at that.

Here’s the key difference: Usyk won all his biggest fights. He dominated two divisions, cleaned them out. Holyfield? Beat two notable guys at cruiser, had a war with a light heavyweight in Qawi, and ruled during an era where the division was in flux, not stacked. At heavyweight, he lost to the best guy he beat twice. Lost to a flawed, inconsistent Moorer and struggled with two past their best greats. But you still act like résumé is everything, while ignoring how those fights went down.

If you actually compare their records without the nostalgia goggles, it’s close. If you value skill, consistency, and dominance, Usyk stands above. If you value squeaking by, losing the biggest fights of your prime, and collecting belts without truly clearing out a division, then sure, Holyfield’s your guy.

 

No problem I will just slightly agree to disagree here.

 

Fine with me nice talking to you have a good day.

 

Called it

 

I actually rank Usyk higher P4P than Holyfield and largely agree with what you are stating.

However, i don't think Usyk would demolish Moorer quite as easily. Usyk has only faced two notable fellow lefties - Glowacki and Mchunu. Glowacki was a good fighter but only about 6 feet tall and not in the league of Moorer. Mchunu was very short and Usyk towered over him and as such, he could control range.

Moorer was about the same height as Usyk and had a powerful right hook. He had a great jab and a solid cross. His left hand wasn't as good as Usyk and he certainly wasn't in Usyk's league defensively. But Moorer had the size, power and ability to give Usyk a hard fight. I don't think Moorer wins but i also think Usyk's strengths vs orthodox fighters would be neutralized to a large degree by Moorer being a fellow southpaw.

Holyfield did not quite have Usyk's consistency but he was facing a wide wide range of styles consistently at heavy. From the quick handed Dokes to a tall jabber mover in Douglas to a enormous power puncher in Foreman, to a skilled inside fighting super heavy in Bowe, to a southpaw in Moorer, to a rugged powerful fighter in Mercer, and even the 96 Tyson still had plenty of speed and power and a unique style.

Usyk is an ATG and my favourite fighter today and i like him a lot more than Holyfield but at heavy, he hasn't faced that many different styles. Yes, Fury and Joshua are quite different but if he had to face so many different styles at heavy over the course of a decade, it would be hard to maintain that level of consistency.

 

Agreed about Moorer he's 6'2 could weigh about 220 and above and he's certainly not a small Heavyweight. Plus he has power and provides a challenging opponent due to his Southpaw style.

I don't know why people assume Moorer would be an easy opponent for Usyk yes he has a bit of shaky chin at Heavyweight but Usyk is not Foreman or Tua in regards to power.

 

Appreciate the fair response. You make some decent points, but I still disagree with the idea that Moorer would give Usyk that much trouble.

Yes, Moorer had a solid jab, sharp combinations, and power in both hands. But he was also notoriously fragile. His defense was leaky, and his ring IQ dropped the moment pressure was applied. He got dropped by guys with far less skill or discipline than Usyk. Bert Cooper had him all over the place. Holyfield—who was sluggish and past his peak in the rematch—eventually broke him down. Usyk’s engine and sustained volume would give Moorer mental and physical hell. Southpaw or not, Usyk’s tempo and adaptability would overwhelm him over the stretch. Moorer could look great for a few rounds, no doubt, but I’d bet heavy on Usyk drowning him late.

As for Holyfield’s variety of opponents—that’s fair. He fought a broad spread of styles at heavyweight. But let’s not over-romanticize it: Douglas was shot, Foreman was 42, Dokes was well past prime, and Mercer was tough but inconsistent. Yes, Bowe was elite and gave him hell. Tyson still had speed and power, but he was neutered by inactivity. Holyfield’s depth of experience is impressive, but his performance across those fights wasn’t exactly dominant.

Usyk hasn’t been around at heavyweight for a decade (yet), but what he has done is fight the biggest, strongest, and most dangerous men available and beat them clean. Joshua twice, Chisora, Dubois, And now Fury, who is the biggest stylistic challenge of them all. A taller, longer, awkward, elusive, and rangy and he still found ways to break him down and outbox him. That fight alone showed Usyk has the adaptability to deal with a freakish style matchup.

Bottom line: Holyfield might’ve seen more style variation, but Usyk has been more dominant, more consistent, and has fewer bad nights. If he keeps going like this, even the depth argument won’t hold for long.