Holyfield in Tyson's place 1986-1989

Holyfield beats them all. Thomas is the only one that gives him trouble.

 

I thought you were a bit silly, now I know.....

 

You do know that Holyfield did beat Thomas a year after Tyson did you silly boy......

 

Of course I do. At the end of 88,about a year and a half after Tyson almost killed him. That was actually Thomas's first fight after the Tyson beating and it looked like he still hadn't recovered. It was just target practice for Holyfield who was just stepping up to Heavyweight.

The Thomas that fought Tyson a year and half previous would have given Holyfield a proper test.

 

Can you
A) stop trolling
B) stop the insults
C) stop the intolerence of any view different to your own
D) stop saying nuthugging every post
E) stop swearing
F) Die

 

I'd say Tokyo Douglas could be an issue. I think he beats the rest on face value but to put another slant on it people forget Holyfield could be inconsistent, its possible he could take a points loss at some point. Its possible.

I think one of the things that gave Tyson his iconic status is the fact he was fully consistent those four years or so, he doesn't get enough credit for that. yeah it was a short prime but during that time he performed as he should have.

before the nut hugger talk starts I am not saying Tyson was the best ever but you have to give credit to any fighter when its due. Holy might be above Tyson in all time status but I dont believe his run would have been as impressive if he was in Tyson's place. Mike whacked them out and made himself an Icon, whatever your opinion regarding the competition.

Other fighters would have a tougher time I believe, or by now you would have someone that succeeded Tyson as one of the biggest faces in boxing history. Its him the mainstream think of because he captured the imagination with those KO's, Ali v Tyson is still the match up the average Joe will bring up.

 

Hahahahaha the Mike Tyson effect, where every opponent is at their best at the time they fight him but are completely ruined after they've been in the ring with him.......

You nuthuggers are something else I'll give you that one.

 

holyfield would have had a more impressive run than he did. he would have been champion from '88 to '99 instead of from '91 to '99.. off and on.

one thing.. tyson never beats holyfield. not from 1984 (when holyfield first made him quit) to 1999. never.

 

I cant see how Holy would have been more impressive, would he have blasted them out like Tyson did? If Holyfield had the ability to capture the imagination like Tyson did then why wasn't his own prime as storied? we are talking before the Tyson infamy, in the 80s he was being regarded as an all timer, right or wrong. when did Holyfled get that status at the early stages of his career, when he was being called a blown up heavyweight that couldnt KO pensioners?

Holyfield could well be better than Tyson but thats not the point.

 

goes both ways though doesn't it, I'm guessing you would go with the theory that everyone Tyson fought was at their worst. I respect the opinion its one that isnt always right either.

 

Anyone in the know would know Thomas wasn't at his best when he fought Tyson. Hell even Jim Watt and Reg Gutteridge were talking about Thomas' personal problems during their fight.

 

you're talking hype sch*t? holyfield being better is THE point, casual. look, man.