In what order do u have Holyfield, Lewis, and Tyson on ur ATG list?

Yes or just as good really especially Holmes. Tyson had no problem as a part time fighter with guys that Lewis was banging his resume out against. Lewis on the other hand struggled with guys like Mercer, Bruno and Mcall fighters more of Tysons era..

 

Old Homes 2 years retired and a Spinks who couldn't cut it at heavy are the best you guys can come up with?

They are not better than 1999 Holyfield, no chance.

 

Lewis, then Tyson, and lastly, Commander Headbutt Evan Fields.

 

Tyson
Holyfield
Lewis

 

Uhmmm... In short, yes...though I didn't say he was better than Holyfield, read closely.

Also, Holmes was only 35...Lewis was 38 when he beat Vitali and many fans rank it as one of his top 5 wins.

 

Holyfield argueably went 1-8 when he faced Lewis with the one win coming via headbutt to Rahman. Holmes on the other hand performed quite well after getting starched by Tyson, and Holmes fought a 12 round exhibition six or seven months before the Tyson fight and before going into training, so really the layoff is often exaggerated because of his one sided embarassing knockout to Tyson.

 

That's because, apparently, you can't read. I never said that Spinks was better than Holyfield. I said he was probably better than anyone Holyfield ever faced at heavyweight and definitely better than anyone Lewis ever faced.

 

I agree. It was still an impressive win. It was the first time Holmes had ever been knocked out and he was still a very good fighter. Really, fans have to stop being hypocrites. You can't give Lewis all the credit in the world for beating an over the hill Tyson or a Holyfield that had been KO'ed by Bowe and give Tyson nothing for beating a lot of good fighter who were past the primes.

 

Well if we're factoring in how they did after the fights as a marker of just how good they were tell me,
How did Spinks do affter Tyson again?
How did Holmes do after Tyson?

And factor in the level of opposition please.

 

And this is because you can't follow a line of conversation, I was addressing Lefthook, not you, but will be sure to quote you from now on so you know bk.:good

 

Look theres no doubt Lewis improved after his loss to Mcall, just like theres no doubt that Tyson declined after his win over Spinks.
Holmes actually did quite well after Tyson, beating Mercer and earning a shot against Holyfield where he performed far better than he did against Tyson. People use the excuse of the layoff, but I dont buy it. Tyson was just too strong, too elusive and too good at that point, and would have beaten Holmes even if Holmes had ten tunueps first.
As far as Lewis I just dont think his resume is any better than Tyson's, in fact I rank solid technicians far higher than I do big punchers with little boxing skills, and Lewis resume is filled with them, whereas Tyson has a better range of mobile skilled fighters which make it far more difficult for a swarmer to dominaite, all the more impressive to me.

 

Four time champ indicates how often Holyfield lost the title...it is far more impressive to stay champ for a long time. Lewis was far, far more dominant than Holyfield.

 

Spinks retired after his loss to Tyson...and for good reason. Holmes remained a good fighter and even easily defeated the same Ray Mercer that came within a point of defeating Lennox Lewis.

 

Spinks 'probably' (like the way you slip that in for cover).

Spinks is not better than Lewis, Tyson, Bowe.

How the hell do you come to that conclusion???

 

Lewis had the most impression overall resume.

Tyson was easily the most dominant.

Holyfield was always a bit overrated because he was a small man in an increasingly large guy's game.