Better opposition: Lewis, Tyson ......

I vote for Holyfield.

He was not named "The Real Deal" for nothing, with victories over the likes of Mike Tyson (twice), Buster Douglas, Larry Holmes, Bert Cooper, Riddick Bowe, John Ruiz ... the list just goes on and on.

 

Holy's opposition trumps them all. He didn't always win those big fights, but he always had the balls to step in there with the very best.... RESPECT!

 

****in hell you americans and holyfield. just look at the fact lewis took on your best and beat them. he had to prove himself time and time again and you still tried to rob him against evander. he was a true heavy who ruled his division. unified it and did it properly. evander was a good champ but imo has not faced better opposition and was the inferior boxer.

 

That portion alone shows your bias. Now look at it objectively.

Holy took on a prime Bowe (probably a better fighter than any Lewis ever fought), Micheal Mooorer, and a much younger more formidable version of Mike Tyson.

Those three names alone trump anyone that Lewis ever fought.

 

edit

 

I voted Holyfield, his opposition was sensational for this era.

 

And lost 2 out of 3, including a brutal beating ending in a knockout defeat.

Who is a notable heavyweight for 3 reasons:

1) Getting starched by a jab from 65 year old Foreman.
2) Getting starched in 30 seconds by David Tua.
3) Beating prime Evander Holyfield.

No arguments that Holy's Tyson was much better than Lewis'. But I make the case that Lewis' Tua was more dangerous than Holy's Tyson.

No, they don't. Lewis has victories over Holy himself (twice), Vitali, Tua, Golota (the same guy who had just finished beating the living **** out of the mythical Bowe, TWICE), Ruddock, Tucker, Bruno, Mercer, Rahman, Morrison etc.

Lewis' HEAVYWEIGHT resume is just as good as Holy's, and the fact that he was MUCH more dominant against his competition makes it better.

:hat

 

:good

:hat

 

You mention Mercer for Lewis....yet ignore that Holyfield beat Mercer more convincingly RIGHT BEFORE Lewis struggled with him.

Look at Holyfield's resume again...Qawi x2 (remember this question was better resume, not better HW resume), De Leon, the aformentioned Mercer, Dokes, Douglas, Foreman, Moorer, Ruiz, Tyson, Holmes, Bowe, Rahman, etc.

As for Bowe being beaten by Golota...be serious...the Bowe that fought Holyfield was ten times the fighter that fought Golota. I realize it was soon after...but his training regimine was GONE...his mind wasnt that much further behind, and it will always be a mystery why Andrew turned into the foul pole in that one...

Plus add in that yes, Evander may have lost more...but he NEVER, EVER ducked, dodged or left any question mark in his career on who there was out there to fight. He is a fighter, who ALWAYS seeked out the best competition possible, from his stint at CW (where is THE...not arguably...but THE greatest CW of all time) to his long running campaign at HW. This is a RARITY in this sport and something that should be applauded tremendously.

Listen I am not one of those that tries to belittle Lewis stellar resume (I would add in Mccall), but I think its a shade weaker than Holyfield's...which I consider an UNREAL resume.

(off topic tho...how in the HOLY HELL did Tyson get 4 votes??? I loved Tyson, but his resume is WEAK compared to the others mentioned)

 

I can definately see your points in this post. I think I am looking at it from a slightly different angle. I only looked at Holy's HW campaign, as Lewis was obviously unable to access those opponents at CW.

I get sick of the Holyfield jockriding here, but your post is clearly not one of those.

Yep. In Lewis' defence, that ring was a phonebooth. It was Lewis' toughest fight of his career, I count that fight as being a top-rate performance by both men.

Yep, but again, I view CW Holy as a different fighter from HW Holy.

I don't deny the quality of the resume, but the fact that he lost to, or went life or death with, so many of those guys counts against him in my eyes. Also, there's nobody on that list that Holy beat that I wouldn't pick Lewis to win a trilogy with, and only a couple that stood a fair chance of taking one victory from three.

Fair enough.

True, but so was Lewis. The two fights missing on Lewis' resume (Bowe and '90s Tyson) are missing because Bowe and Tyson wanted nothing to do with Lennox. If it were up to Lewis, the fights would have happened.

I don't add in McCall, as I don't consider it a "real" victory for Lewis in the rematch. However, I believe Lennox would have beaten him again even if McCall had of come to fight, and also I think that the first fight was a bull**** stoppage.

Yeah, fair enough too. For me, a lot of the guys on Holy's list are only notable because they put up good performances against/beat Evander Holyfield. For example, I think the David Tua who Lewis fought gives Holy as much trouble as anyone Holy faced. I could see Mavrovic giving Holy trouble too. I was very impressed with him against Lewis.

I guess for me, the competition level is pretty much even at HW. Holy has the advantage overall because of his work at CW. However, Lewis' domination of his opponents tips the balance in his favour. There's no-one Lewis ever faced that got the better of him.

Who knows? Morons, I guess.

:hat

 

Tyson's resume was NOT weak, it was quite good as a matter of fact. And the way he dominated and cleaned his era the way he did speaks volumes about how good he was.

 

:jjj

:hat

 

I can respect everything that you said up there...but the thing I put in bold/underline/italics I DEFINATELY agree with...

 

Agreed, Tyson never just beat his oppenents, he dominated them.

Holyfield easily has the better resume, he fought good fighters in there primes, Lewis rarely did that.