Holyfield or Foreman - Resume

Take a look at Eddie Machen fought two draws with world class ranked contenders williams and folley, should he get credit on his resume for this or should these fights be cancelled out?

 

Highly debatable. Going into their respective fights neither were quite what they once had been but certainly both appeared to have at least a good deal left. Infact Tyson's performance against Bruno was IMO his very best since losing the title to Buster 6 years prior.

 

Foreman was somthing like 47 years old when he fought Savarese, and are you sure that Lou wasn't rated?

 

tyson looked much better in the ruddock fights....

 

He was younger, yes but that's not entirely the point. In the Bruno fight he showed better combination punching, more frequent headmovement, better footwork and timing on his shots thatn had been seen for a good while and was at least in as good condition. He didn't just wade straight in throwing bombs it was patient but devestating.

 

What fighter did Holyfield fight at age 47 that was better than a 36-0 professional? Sulatan Ibragimov was no better than Savarese and he kicked Holy's ass.

Savarese was a good fighter for Foreman at that stage....

 

I'll agree that Tyson was better in 1991, then he was in 1996, but he looked pretty damn good in destroying Frank Bruno who was coming off a career win over McCall. You also have to consider that Holyfield was probably even further past his prime. Christ look at how he got knocked out against Bowe, and plus the health issues he had recently gone through. Do you think it was a prime Holyfield who fought TYson?

 

Holyfield. He beat better fighters.

 

I thought Tyson looked sloppy against Razor Ruddock.

As for Lou Savarese, no, he shouldn't have been ranked in '97.
His 36-0 was empty of any real contenders. Lou was quite a decent fighter though.

 

They should be credited as just that: draws, not wins.