Holyfield - Potential

I agree,

I have stated many times before that I felt Holyfield's TRUE peak was likely between about 1988-1991, or therabouts. He was still reasonably competitive from 1993-1998, but not by any means prime. He was a shell of his former self going in against Ruiz, Toney, Donald, and Byrd. Against Ibragimov, he was an exhumed cadaver of a once great fighter.

 

His wins over Dokes, Douglas, Foreman, Bowe, Mercer and Moorer are worth checking out.
Win over Tyson was good.
The way he dispatched lesser fighters like (shot)Thomas, Rodrigues and McDonagh was impressive too.

He was perhaps the greatest combination puncher at heavyweight, bar none. Tons of determination, heart, and a great athlete and a clever boxer. "The Real Deal".

 

Qawi
Dokes
Douglas
Foreman
Bowe II
Tyson I
Tyson II
Moorer II

He was past his prime for the last four that I listed, but still very competitive nonetheless, and gave very good performances. I think his true peak was around 1990 when he was 28 years old, and winning the title against Douglas. Following this fight his activity levels slowed down considerably. By the time he fought Bowe in 1992, he was 30 years old and had looked diminished in his two previous performances against Bert Cooper and a 42 year old Holmes. Not to mention, he had already acheived tremendous wealth and great status, so his hunger and drive was not what it used to be or so it seemed. The Bowe loss was a wake up call, causing Holyfield to muster up enough for one last prime performance, but I think his actual PEAK was gone.

 

His resume trashes dempsey and listons, so ranking him outside of top 10 cuz he has more past prime losses is really stupid.

 

In all fairness, Jack Dempsey did not always fight the very best men of his career, and called it quits at age 32. Neither of these things can be said for Holyfield. He always fought the best men of his era, which was a much stronger one than Dempsey's, and continued fighting well into his mid 40's. Some people rate Jack Dempsey as high as #1 on an all time list, while not even having Holyfield in their top 10. I don't see the logic in this philosophy.

 

hate to bore you guys with top ten lists but i'm thinking of where i'd put holy so i have to make it...

1. ali
2. louis
3. liston
4. holmes
5. dempsey
6. foreman
7. marciano
8. frazier
9. evander holyfield
10. lennox lewis

lewis fans can argue about 9 & 10 but that's my personal assessment. tyson would be 11.

back to the subject...

i have holyfield at 9.

i DON'T count the toney fights, that is like counting berbicks win over ali. let's be reasonable in giving a fair assessment of a fighter for the significant part of his career.

it's funny, every time i make a top ten list from scratch - it is almost exactly like my top 10 list 6 months ago i.e. it hardly changes.

and a good way of me knowing is i've noticed the pyramid with the listed names getting increasing longer e.g.

-
__
____
______

 

Well then, where do you rate Ali? Because as we speak I reckon I am pick-em against him....

 

Surprised you have him that high...He was knocked out COLD:dead twice in his career even though he avenged both defeats...

I'm talking **** like he was rubbish, I actually have him at #7-8:yep

 

I'm going to be in the minority here but what else is new. FWIW, I do count all fights..peak and prime fights more than others, but I certainly don't believe a professional fighter should be fighting if he expects only the wins to mean something. If a fighter wants a legacy they should consider retiring before they're totally shot, especially in Holyfield's case, it's not like he needs the money. Overall, I have him just outside my top 10 at heavyweight but have no issues if he's in the 8-10 range, but on a p4p heavyweight list and a cruiserweight list he's certainly at or near the top of each. In terms of potential, I think he pretty much accomplished all that could be expected. I suppose if he'd won the Bowe trilogy then I would have him in the 8-10 range, maybe a bit higher but not much.

 

that's convenient for you, because you're a lewis fan :fire

he was very good with regards to this. he went out at the right time unlike his contemporaries. he should be credited for that. he is congratulated in the sense he didn't get publicaly humilated like his contemporaries, didn't suffer in the ring when he shouldn't have, and got to enjoy life. and he benefitted that for the next 10 years people wouldn't remember him losing to a much lesser fighter (as they do for holy or tyson).

but this world of warriors - does not make PRACTICAL sense. look at achilles. he was given 2 choices: live a long, comfortable life or die young but be rememeber forever. he chose the latter.

as a warrior, 50 years later or whatever, you are remembered for your days as a top. near peak fighter - not when you were 40 years old. fans only count it immediately after the event but long time later that doesn't count for anything.

so from the warrior angle, joe louis fighting till his late 30s and lennox not, will have little bearing when assessing these warriors (whether that makes practical sense or not is another thing).

:nut

 

Well Lewis did fight til his late 30's so I don't really know where you're coming from on that. And I do consider Holyfield's career better than Lewis's as well as think he's a better P4P fighter, so the only thing I give the nod to Lewis on is his career at heavy verses Evander.

As for Holyfield, I don't feel it's fair to give him prop's for winning another belt, if he in fact does, and not count the losses. How as a professional fighter can you possibly think the outcome doesn't matter, of course it does, otherwise what's the point?

Now that doesn't mean things can't be put in context. Did Toney beat Holyfield, yes, but it was a late 30's (or maybe even an early 40) version of Holyfield, not a prime Holyfield.

As to your point about being remembered, I personally think a fighters legacy is held in higher regard if they get out at or near the top, rather than loss numerous fights at the end. I don't really see how that helps one's legacy.