Does Lewis get to little or to much credit for beating Holyfield and Tyson

This content is protected

 

Don't call me a liar.

You continuously ignore the fact that Holyfield was washed up, in an effort to use your usual method of applying circular logic to build up Lewis. While you may not have used the words " Evander was in his prime", you made plenty of implications that may have led one to believe that you felt he was. You're quote of me illudes to this. John Thomas claearly BELIEVES that Holyfield was in his prime. Not John Thomas clearly STATED.

Before you call someone a ****ing liar, make sure you understand what they wrote

 

I'm not part of your tiff with JT, but would be interested to read your reply to my earlier post. How is that a non-puncher at heavyweight (Toney) can floor Holyfield when an undisputed big puncher at heavyweight (Lewis) cannot? Clue: the delivery systems of either Toney or Lewis are not the factor here.

 

Despite being past his prime, Holyfield put up a better show in 1999 than the lighter, non-Roid version of '91 likely would have done. That version would have been starched.

 

No doubt bout it, the KO was awesome, maybe even his best one-punch KO. However, it does not demonstrate that Tyson had retained much of his other skills. It demonstrated that Tyson hit hard, which was hardly a revelation.
That is the blessing of a KO artist - you can be losing every second of every round (Not saying Tyson was, mind you) and in an instant switch things around with one shot.

It probably did, but at the same time Golota's sudden 'no mas' came as a surprise to most - hence the outrage of the fans that night. If he was getting belted from pillar to post, I don't think anyone would have begrudged him giving up. What surprised people was that as it was developing into a decent fight, Golota quit.

But the key in this fight was that Nielsen hardly made Tyson work for the win. He took refuge in the corners and covered up and occasionally delivered some harmless punches. By round 3 nobody was wondering who would win, but rather when it would end. Tyson wasn't tested in the least bit by Nielsen.

Which is something we always knew about Tyson. What we didn't know (and only found out in the Lewis bout) was what would happen when those two qualities didn't guarantee and early knockout. That was the knock on Tyson back then - It's all fine and well getting early KO's, but what happens later in the fight if he didn't get a quick KO?
Fact is, nobody knew for sure, but previous fights did give an indication.

I've never tried to knock Lewis for the win, let's get that out of the way first. Tyson was indeed still dangerous early and Lewis did well to come out of the danger zone unscathed.
Thing is, the drop-off in performance from Tyson's first round to say, his fourth round against Lewis was pretty obvious. A Tyson in 96 would have been still really dangerous by this point. The 2002 version just wasn't - aside from having a puncher's chance.
You could see it just by his body language. He didn't want to be there anymore.

I believe you, but thousands wouldn't.


In all seriousness though, it was an okay win for Lewis, but somehow over the years it seems to be seen as one of his best fights which is simply not the case, at least in my book.

 

zero.they were both over the hill.that goes for anybody that fights somebody over their prime. holmes/ali tyson/holmes etc

 

Holyfield was a bit faded imo. Certainly not at his peak but still a very capable opponent. So a good win for Lewis.
Tyson is a similar case but a little further down the line. A Tyson that faded was a good fighter when Lewis fought him but was still a shadow of the brilliant fighter who menaced the cokeheads from the 80's.

 

Well John Thomas doesn't clearly believe Holyfield was in his prime, and John Thomas sure as hell knows better than Monsieur Magoo so next time be more careful about what you write and don't go off the deep end and make a **** of yourself.

How do you like those apples?

 

You might be onto summin there, hmmmm :hey

 

Monsieur Magoo prefers this particular variety of apples.

Next time be more clear about how you state your points, so that people know wtf you're talking about, therefore you won't make such an ingnorant ass of yourself.

 

I didn't claim anything, but merely pointed out that Holyfield fighting the likes of shot Tillis, Thomas and co wasn't the great standout you made it out to be.

It was a fine win but Dokes hadn't beaten anybody at all in his comeback excepting the reasonable Pritchard. This hardly made him the comet of the division. The questions centered around Holyfield and how he would adapt to the weight. The answer was quite well, and Dokes was an excellent test at the time and fought above expectations.

Well we've already agreed on that.

Thomas was very likely past fading to be honest. It was a long year and a half back to Tyson, and he looked slow and tired then IMO.

Have you seen Thomas at his best, as in vs Tillis or Coetzee?

I'll leave the detailed explanation for fine young peeps like Dop and Chris, but i'll venture a comment. I like Lewis anytime after the Steward effect started taking place. He was fighting quite well from 97 all the way to 2002 i think with one letdown in that time.

Well you care enough to hide it eh lol. Witherspoon lost in a blink to Crusher, was he 4 years past it? Pretty big omission was Williams - Weaver. Very convenient.

Putting my thoughts to paper again? Who said anything about Thomas' "legacy" resting on this victory?

I'll be needing a lot more than that.

Well of course it can, but it's not the crutch you made it out to be when it suited.

Tyson tore up the divison when he came thru, need i say more?

didn't think so

 

You made the statement and can't back it up nor live with it. Bottom line - you fukked up. Be a man and fess up :good

If one is going to dish it out he has to be able to take it back. No use spitting the dummy.

If you can somehow turn banter of Holyfield still being a fine win into someone claiming he was still prime then maybe some basic comprehension skills might be missing i think.

 

I could respond to all this if I felt like it, but frankly I don't think that that it will make a difference and I'm content and satisfied with the points that I've made. I can clearly see that nothing I say is going to change your mind either. That being said, let's just call it a day.

 

I thought Lewis would mash Tyson, pretty much in the fashion that he did. :good