Is Holyfield THE G.O.A.T?

I think he is great but not the greatest. I think more people underrate him than overrate him. Most of his big fights at HW were while he was past age 30... as a matter of fact he did not lose as a pro until he was 30. Let's look at what he did before age 30-

-He went 28-0 (22) overall and fought very few bums.
-He went 10-0 (7) in World title bouts
-He went 4-0 (1) vs. Hall of Famers
-He had been the Undisputed World Champ at CW (vacated)
-He was the reigning Undisputed World Champ at HW

After age 30 he fought Bowe x3, Moorer x2, Mercer, Tyson x2

After age 35 he fought Lewis x2, Ruiz x3

He was almost 40 when he fought Rahman

After age 40 he fought Byrd, Toney, Donald, Oquendo, Savarese

He was almost 45 when he fought Ibragimov

After age 45 he fought Valuev

At age 49 he will fight Povetkin!

I honestly believe that Holyfield was better than any of the fighters he lost to... although not by much in the case of Lewis and even Bowe.

At his very best I think he was better than most H2H. I have Ali and Holmes above him. I think he'd beat Foreman, Louis, and others H2H prime vs. prime. I think prime vs. prime he beats Bowe (more times than not), Tyson (almost always), and Lewis (more times than not).

Too many people look at what he did past age 30, 35, 40, even past age 45 way too much. The man went undefeated from late 1984 - late 1992 and was fighting top fighters pretty much right away.

GOAT? No
One of the best? yes

 

I have him at #3 as well.

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Holyfield
4. Foreman
5. Louis

 

on a given night, holyfield at his best might be able to defeat anyone who has ever stepped in the ring. he's top 50 lb for lb imo who was exciting as hell to watch.

 

As much as I would certainly like to award Holyfield the honor of being the one and only G.O.A.T, I am afraid that there is no argument strong enough to support it. While he had a tremendous iist of wins, he also had some dents in his resume that knock him down several places on an all time list. Losing two out of three to Riddick Bowe, with at least one of those defeats coming near prime is one such example. In addition, even though he regained the title or fragments of the title on multiple occasions, his reigns were always short lived with few or sometimes no title defenses. Lastly, while he did beat many heavyweight notables, a fair number of them were past their best at the time of the meetings.

Holyfield has my vote as the very greatest cruiserweight in history, as well as being the only man to capture heavyweight titles on 5 different occasions. He also has longevity that is nearly unmatched and wins over Mike Tyson, Riddick Bowe, Ray Mercer, Michael Moorer, Michael Dokes, James Douglas, Hasim Rahman, John Ruiz and a resurgent George Foreman.. This is enough in my eyes to make the top 10, but no where near close to #1.

 

I agree with this.

Even though I can't rate him as the best from a legacy standpoint, on the night he beat James Douglas at 28 years of age and in peak form, he might have very conceivably upset anyone and definitely given any or all the great champions hell. His career was extremely long, but his "peak" was short lived; probably ranging from his last cruiser bout with Deleon to his 1991 meeting with George Foreman.

 

He never had anything remotely like the reign of terror Tyson had in the division but he had longevity and great heart.

 

+1

Holyfield isn't even top 5.

Incidentally it was the Tyson fights that actually made him.

I doubt he be on anyone's top 10 lists if he hadn't beaten Mike Tyson.

 

Has a stronger case P4P than HW.

 

I always remember Holyfield for being a greater fighter than he was a Champion. What I mean is that in his biggest fights at Heavyweight it's almost always a situation where he's walking to the ring the challenger in most cases to titles he just lost or previously owned as opposed to walking in the champion. He never had a coherent reign it's why I rate him below Tyson. It's why I rate Louis above Ali. I suppose tenure as champion scores highly with me. I do however take into account quality of opposition but in either scenario, I can't conceivably list Holyfield above Lewis, Louis, Tyson, or Marciano like you have. I also Jack Johnson above Evander but I'm certain that there will be some who disagree.

 

Any taint from the Evan Fields saga?

 

No

 

For a man who is condfident enough to dress in drag for a Burger King commercial, Holyfield might be the best in the last 20+ years at heavyweight. Trying to compare early to mid 20th Century fighters to late 20th- early 21st Century fighters is a bit "unfair". (Although I am not a big believer in "fair".) It reminds me of Mike Krukow on KNBR who would chortle: "Barry Bonds is the greatest of all time!" Apparently Mike forgot about George Herman Ruth. There is something to be said for a man who could eat a dozen of mother Gehrig's brautwursts in a sitting and still hit 600 foot homeruns.

Had Joe Lewis had access to Holyfield's training regimen, I think the Real Deal might have been more than a bit surprised. But, he wouldn't have backed down either.

 

I watched the Bert Cooper fight. What was impressive was Holyfield was out on his feet. Literally. And I watched him snap back to conciosuness and win that fight. Best or not, he's a dude.

 

He is not the greatest of all time because he lost to many guys, but to be honest his accomplishments and fighting and beating Tyson and Bowe in divisions where he moved up from cruiserweight is impressive. He fought everyone and always gave a good account of himself. If someone says GOAT I am not going to argue much just because he did do everything in his career.

 

It doesn't take a genius to figure out the true motive behind this thread.Just another Tyson die-hard,still hurting over his idol's defeats to a greater fighter,looking for anything to discredit and demean Holyfield with.