Hopkins easily. He's mixed it up with way more pfp guys and done alright...far fewer spotty performances before being old as hell...really long title reign. Heavyweights don't get more credit just for being bigger.
i went with holyfield based on resume and accomplishments... no knock on bhop though...he is almost just as high up there...
Yeah cuz Howard Eastman, Morade Hakkar, Robert Allen, Syd Vanderpool, and Keith Holmes are just p4p badasses. Holyfield constantly faced the best and did so without facing mediocre fighters inbetween. Don't bother bringing up the Czyz fight cuz even the best fighters do that and the Bean fight was a mandatory and Holyfield's chance to fight in front of his home fans.
Can I pick Hopkins and then not back it up?? I have an irrational conviction that he is the greater fighter, but I think the evidence sides with Holyfield a little. **** it, I'm changing my mind to Hopkins.
Hopkins. Hopkins has the longevity, he also is considered in the top 2 or 3 middleweights of all time. Holyfeld is conisdered the top cruiserweight ever but that division is a lot younger and hasnt had as many greats there. Holyfeld accomplished a lot at heavy but he is around 9-11 all time there. Holyfeld faced better opposition but he also lost to them too and Hopkins was more consistent.
I think Evander might rank higher. Hard to say. I go back and forth. Hopkins had guys moving up to fight him at times, and Evander moved up and fought bigger guys.
Holyfield had two separate careers as the best Cruiser in history and an exiting HW who fought the best competition available. What is in favor of Hopkins is his longevity when he actually stepped up in his later age and won some good fights ... but overall I'm more impressed with Holyfield
Hopkins by a big margin. Holyfield at HW was largely one giant US hypejob that looked good against shorter fighters. Holyfield was finally exposed as guy relying on headbutts and clinching by Lewis. The Lewis fight marked the end of Holyfield.