Lennox Lewis is overrated

But then when you factor in the fact that Lewis beat Holyfield (who WAS NOT shot, before you even try to say it. He was rated above Lewis - you aren't saying Holy was more overrated han Lewis are you? :think )

... and add to that the fact that Lewis was never out-pointed by second rater like Moorer (no I personally don't believe he is second rater, but if you believe Rahman & McCall are then you must believe Moorer was... unless you apply uneven and biased criteria....:blood )

.... and add to that the fact that Lewis was never kncked down by a THIRD rater like cooper


...then the choice becomes murky again.

 

I always enjoy these posts of yours, Drexl.

 

Riddick Bowe was considered by most people to be the best heavyweight in the world going into that 3rd match with Holyfield.

In the first fight, Bowe was considered, along with Lennox Lewis, by far the best available challenger, Ruddock having been eliminated, Tyson in jail.

And in the second fight, Bowe was champion and expected to beat Holyfield inside the distance.

Holyfield was already thought to be in decline by that 3rd match, already 33 and having looked bad against Moorer two fights earlier. So he wasn't in the "heart of his prime at heavyweight", IMO.

I actually think Holyfield's prime was about 1987 to 1993, that's a LONG PRIME. He didn't have two primes, one at cruiser and one at heavy, that's often the implication of such statements and it makes no sense.

The fact that Bowe proved better than Holyfield between Nov. '92 and Nov. '95 is no problem for me to accept.
Since Bowe was considered the top heavyweight in the world for most of that time, and since Holyfield did score a win over Bowe in that period I dont see how it reflects badly on Holyfield.

Like you say - "We're talking about real results here, not hypotheticals and what ifs." - and the reality shows Holyfield was fighting the best at that time, and capable of beating the men who beat him, one of which many were saying was the best fighter out there.

Bowe came and went. Holyfield was number 1 contender and undisputed champion before Bowe arrived, and was rated either number 1 or 2 (depends who you ask) in the years after Bowe disappeared.

Holyfield's record against Bowe has positive and negative aspects. It's not just black and white.
I remember watching Holyfield become only the third man in history (after Floyd Patterson & Muhammad Ali) to regain the championship, and against the predictions of almost everyone. I knew then that there is no way should he be remembered as an ordinary champion. That was when he beat Bowe in 1993.
I challenge anyone to watch all three Holyfield-Bowe fights and then say that nothing positive can be credited to his legacy because Bowe won the series.

And those fights are just a small portion of Holyfield's record of many fights against the best fighters of his era. When you add it all up there is only one conclusion to be made ....

Holyfield is one of the GREAT heavyweights.

 

Holyfield was held up by the ropes - he was on his way to the canvas otherwise, no doubt about that.

So you're seriously suggesting that in all the wins Lewis had, he was never hurt? He was definately hurt by Briggs and VITLAY for a start. Just because he didn't stagger back into the ropes like Evander did doesn't mean he wasn't hit.

Fact of the matter is Lewis is 2-0 against Holyfield, you're argument doesn't hold water :yep

 

I love the way the Tyson that Holyfield faced was 'still formidable' and the Tyson Lewis faced was 'totally shot' :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

Oh and there's still no response to Evander getting stopped by a James Toney body shot either :huh

 

Zakman is like a politition, he tap dances around questions he chooses not to respond to.I don't understand why Holifield get's the free pass of "a faded Evander" even though they are almost the same age and Lewis fought well into his late 30's . And evander couldn't beat John Ruiz in a trilogy but it doesn't count in Zaks book.And as for Toney that was a brutal beating he gave Evander, that was his best fight as a heavyweight.

 

Yes, going life and death with 'ham and eggers' like Bowe, Moorer, old Foreman (

This content is protected

), Bert Cooper and old Holmes (

This content is protected

) sure did a lot of damage to poor Evander didn't it, or was it the Bean fight that was the final nail in the coffin of Evanders prime?

But it wasn't all that bad, because Evander lasted til the later rounds against a fat middleweight who has no power, before he got taken out?

Damn you're amusing.

 

:good You tell em WEIGHT ! And dont forget how you just described HOLY when comparing him to certain other fighters ! :yep PS I totally agree with you here !:deal

 

The biggest win of his career came in late 1996, but that's the problem with Holyfield, his career at heavyweight is so uneven. For example he was supposedly "past it" against Moorer and Bowe in the rubber match, but his biggest victory came after that, he looked as good as he ever has against Tyson. He was supposedly well past his prime against Lewis even though he was the heavy betting favorite and even though he was just over two years removed from his biggest win and hadn't been in any particularly draining fights since then

The fact is, the flaws in Holyfield's game were exposed by Bowe and Moorer, and Lewis. Holyfield was basically in his prime when he fought the first two. Against both of them, his lack of power and tendency to fight on guts and instinct rather than using smarts bit him in the ass.

Moorer has a glass jaw, and would not make it halfway through a match with Lewis, Bowe, or Tyson. But Holyfield's lack of punching power hurt him and he got outworked by a smaller and quicker opponent.

Against Bowe in the first fight, he elected to go toe to toe with a bigger, stronger, harder hitting opponent who happened to excel at fighting the style of fight Holyfield favored. In the rematch when he won, Holyfield had Manny Steward in his corner and Manny devised a smart gameplan where Holyfield boxed a lot smarter and narrowly outhustled Bowe, who was out of shape compared to the other two fights.

In the third fight, he abandoned the smarter strategy he used to win the second fight and even though he dropped Bowe and had him in serious trouble with a perfectly placed left hook, he was basically dominated the entire fight and eventually got beaten into submission. That's why he lost those fights, not because he was past it.

Against Tyson, he looked as good as ever because Evander matches up perfectly against Tyson and has the style and chin to frustrate and demoralize Iron Mike, which is why I'd pick Holyfield over Tyson at any point

Against Lewis, Holyfield finally ran into a prime, true blue heavyweight with an excellent outside game. In the first match Lewis made Holyfield look like an amateur by jabbing his head off and thumping him with well timed, well setup straight rights. In the rematch, Lewis seemingly felt he had to mix it up more to impress the judges after being screwed the first time around, and used a foolish strategy of standing and trading more often that played right into Evander's hands so surprise surprise Evander looked a lot better and not so shot as his backers say he was in the first fight. But even then Lewis's superior boxing skills shone through. For example even though the crowd and announcers were creaming themselves over Holyfield winging power shots that were missing, Lewis would counter Holyfield's 10 ineffective misses with a ripping uppercut and Evander would calm down for a while. I had the fight 116-112 for Lewis, I've watched it many times and I have yet to hear anyone who claims Holyfield won explain which 7 rounds Holyfield supposedly took. And often overlooked is that Holyfield should've had at least 1-2 points deducted for repeated intentional headbutts. The best shot Holyfield hit Lewis with all night was a haymaker with his skull :yep

Holyfield backers do everything they can to minimize the significance of every loss he had, while overhyping every single win over a name opponent. Like with Bowe. He was "shot" when he got his ass kicked by Golota, even though he was coming off a big win over Holyfield. Bowe was a flash in the pan, who rose to prominence because he was in the right place and right time, and matched up perfectly against Holyfield. Bowe would've been humiliated by Larry Holmes, and KTFO by Tyson and Lewis, he was fortunate enough to come along at just the right moment when there was a champ he matched up well against. I hear about how "great" Bowe is and all of his supposed greatness is based on 2 wins. Bowe was never great, he was a heavily flawed and incomplete boxer. He had no defense and his outside game was at best adequate. Both of these significant flaws weren't particularly relevant against Holyfield, because Holyfield's power at heavyweight no more than average. He was badly exposed the only time he fought another good big heavyweight with a good outside game. If Golota's power was above average, Bowe would've been KTFO within 4 rounds in each of those fights. But Bowe managed to spend his entire career hidden away from the biggest punchers in the division. There's a reason he turned down a career high payday to fight Lennox Lewis and instead opted to fight Michael Dokes. Was he physically gifted? Yes but he was far from being a great boxer. Holyfield backers, though, have to hype him up excessively because how else can they explain Holy being heavily dominated by him?

Holyfield backers always like to say he was past it when he lost to Moorer but if he was so past it, he wouldn't have scored the biggest win of his career a couple years later

 

Ain't that the truth. The guy "twists and turns like a twisty-turny thing" as Melchett from Blackadder II might have said. It's utterly impossible to have a grown-up debate with him. He only responds to the points he feels he can defend and still maintain his position.

 

Yes but he'd still beat the **** out of Glass WALDO and QUITLAY :hey

 

you just can't help yourself can you?

 

:yep I love your consistency !