It was close but I did watch it not long ago and had Moorer edging it. I think Moorer was just more consistent over the 12 rounds especially with his jab.
DLH ranking above Holyfield on an all-time list doesn't exist in my opinion. I respect Oscar and what he's accomplished in his career but for me he's a Great of his era while Holyfield is an ATG. To cite an important ranking, Bert Sugar's top 100 includes Holyfield, but not De La Hoya. It's just opinion, but comparing careers I don't think it's possible to put DLH ahead of Holyfield in an all time ranking. We're talking about the best cruiserweight of all time and one of the top 15 heavyweights of all time.
Holyfield isn't the best Cruiserweight of all time Usyk is based on resume and Cruiserweight division doesn't have a deep history. The lower weightclasses have a deeper pool of elite fighters and ODLH beat and fought alot more notable opponents and had a better record in world title fights. Bert Sugar also had Dempsey as the 9th best fighter in history so I don't always agree with his takes.
In my opinion Holyfield and Usyk are the two best cruiserweights of all time, and Holyfield has more important victories than DLH, two Qawi victories (the first was a very close fight, no doubt about that, but the second was a clear knockout) and the important victory over an undefeated Bowe, in addition to being the best cruiserweight and among the top 15 heavyweights of all time, whit , as I said. DLH defeated Whitaker after a very close fight, in which the verdict could have gone to both fighters (the same with Quartey), Chavez was declining and then lost to Trinidad, Mosley (even though in my opinion Oscar hadn't lost to Tito and in the rematch with Mosley), Hopkins, Mayweather, Pacquiao, and was given a gift against Sturm, who had won the fight. If we take away a declining Chavez and the victory after a very close fight against Whitaker (and the rematch with Mosley, which in my opinion he had won), DLH has lost to the best boxers he's faced. These are the reasons why I say Holyfield is an ATG and Oscar a Great of his era. I also disagree with Bert Sugar's ranking. We'd be hard-pressed to agree on a top 100 or top 50; there are so many fighters, and it's normal to have different opinions (I cited that ranking because the person who started the thread said they'd never seen a ranking where Holyfield is ahead of DLH). I also think no ranking should ever be dogma, but it can be an important starting point to consider, if written by an authoritative and competent person, as Bert Sugar certainly was.
For me he's among the top 15 heavyweights, but ranking him 10th or 12th makes little difference in my opinion, we're still talking about a great champion and an ATG. I've never been a fan of Holyfield, but I was of De La Hoya when he fought, but I think fighters should be judged objectively by analyzing their careers, regardless of whether they're fans or not.
Qawi's best weightclass was at Light Heavyweight and whilst he was still good at Cruiserweight I wouldn't rate that win over Whitaker at Welterweight who is also a greater fighter than Qawi. Holyfield's best win over Bowe was also a very close fight that could've gone either way which you didn't mention. And Holyfield was a bit lucky the fan man interrupted in the 7th round in which it appeared that Bowe was starting to regain control of the fight. Holyfield wasn't exactly winning all his big fights either. 1-2 vs Bowe 0-1-1 vs Lewis should really be be 0-2 the draw was a robbery. 1-1 vs Moorer ODLH had big wins against.... Vargas Chavez x2 Quartey Whitaker And as you rightly said the Tito and Mosley 2 fights were bad decisions there's no way either of those fighters won those fights. Holyfield also wasn't fighting as many young prime elite fighters as ODLH. Holyfield's overall record in championship fights was 16-7 compared to 24-5 for ODLH. ODLH had better consistency overall he fought more notable names and has a better resume overall.
@Ike just to add. Holyfield was ranked in the top 10 P4P for 6 years and peaked at number 4. ODLH was ranked in the top 10 P4P for 9 years and peaked at number 1 for 2 consecutive years. Another strong argument in favour of ODLH.
Big win against Whitaker? That was a very close fight, in which a good number of media saw Sweet Pea win. Boxrec reports this: "According to a Las Vegas Review-Journal poll of writers who covered the fight, 14 scored it for Whitaker, 11 for De La Hoya, and one scored it a draw." I won't add anything else. You can compare that match to Qawi vs. Holyfield 1, another very close fight, but then Holyfield knocked out Qawi in four rounds in the rematch. So I'd exclude Whitaker from the big wins, as the two came against a declining Chavez (an 11-year age difference between him and the Golden Boy). Quartey is another very close fight where either side could have won. Vargas? Good win, but not better than the one against Carlos De Leon (who was a better boxer than Vargas (El Ferocious lost to Trinidad, DLH, Mosley, Mayorga and win witch a controversial decision against Wright, only against Quartey he have a clear victory). De La Hoya, this is according to his career, not me has more losses than wins against the best boxers he's fought. Listen, you and I have different opinions on Holyfield and De La Hoya. We do sometimes, and that's okay. If we all thought the same way, the world would be boring. Instead, the world is beautiful because it's diverse. I think there's no point in continuing. I don't want to convince anyone of my ideas, and I'm happy to accept those who think differently. Discussion is always a good thing. Have a good night.
Yes a big win vs Whitaker. Whitaker was an ATG and was 10-0 in Welterweight title fights prior to the ODLH fight. Qawi was good at Cruiserweight but he was only 5'6 and was better suited as a Light Heavyweight which was his best weight Whitaker as i said was an ATG and was an ATG Welterweight. Qawi was a lower tier great at Light Heavyweight and just a good Cruiserweight. I'm not talking about how close the fights were i'm talking about Whitaker being much more highly rated than Qawi even if he was past his prime it's still a very significant win. Why would you exclude Whitaker as big win because ODLH won a close fight ? Do we also exclude Holyfield's win over Bowe then ? because that was a very close fight ? and Holyfield was aided by a very beneficial break in the action from the "Fan Man" in which Bowe looked to be regaining control of the fight. De Leon was in campaigning in a newly created Cruiserweight division reigning in what was a wasteland of a division at that time. Vargas beat the likes of Winky Wright and Ike Quartey and he was facing absolute killers in probably one of the strongest eras at that time. Disagreeing is fine but if you're discrediting ODLH for winning close fights and losing big fights then you have to apply the same logic Holyfield aswell. Holyfield lost to the 2 best Heavyweights of his era Bowe, Lewis. Holyfield went 1-1 with Moorer. Holyfield is considered the 3rd best Heavyweight of his era behind Bowe, Lewis. And finally as i've said before if you look at the stats they all favour ODLH. ODLH = 24-5 in world title fights, top 10 P4P for 9 years peaking at number 2 for years. Holyfield = 16-7 in world title fights, top 10 P4P for 6 years peaking at number 4.
I love Evander Holyfield. One of my very favorite fighters. Always in great shape. Always fought with heart. Always took on the best men he could get fights with. But for all my admiration of him I can’t rate him as high as some of his pound for pound contemporaries like Jones, Whitaker etc. he needed to win more of his big fights. Granted I understand that he was already starting to age by the time some of the big super fights of the nineties came around.. that and he was fighting in a near impossible division and era to stay undefeated in. But some things just needed to be better
I view Holyfield as a H2H all time great. Prime Holyfield (88-92) gives absolutely everyone in history at Cruiserweight and Heavyweight a nightmare. I agree the resume looks patchy now and that he’s a victim of carrying on too long. A lot of fight fans fail to realise that Holyfield was years past his prime when boxing the likes of Tyson (96) Lewis (99) Ruiz (01) Valuev (08) yet was still highly competitive.
Man, as I was saying, we have different ideas, that's fine, I don't want to convince anyone and I'm happy to accept that others think differently. There are journalists and boxing historians who think like me, there will be some who think like you, that's fine, have a nice day.
Because he lost too much and wasn't dominant after the Douglas fight. Holyfields record against HW contenders is 19-9-2. And its not just that he lost but a lot of Holyfields legacy is built on title shots coming off losses that fighters in other eras wouldn't have gotten. Holyfield got the shot at Tyson after losing his belt to Moorer and the Bowe trilogy. He lost to Lennox then Lennox got stripped of the WBA and Holyfield was right back to being champ. Holyfield fought Lennox/Bowe/Moorer/Foreman/Tyson a total of 10 times while the rest of the group fought each other 3 times at most. But Holy went 5-4-1 in those fights. That stat is because everyone kept giving him chances not because he was better. Theres also PEDs. They are overreacting but look how other sports treat guys who took PEDs often without hard proof.