Lennox Lewis' opposition

While Lewis opposition was very good, I can't see how anyone thinks Holyfields opposition was worse when it's obvious that just isn't the case. While you can make an argument for Lewis being the better fighter you can't say he beat better opposition.

 

It is about style. Dempsey, Frazier, Marciano ALL RETIRED by 32 years of age. You naturally lose speed and reflexes at 36 (Tyson was 3 weeks shy of his birthday) that you need to make up for size. Lewis didn't have that dependency.

Does rating Holyfield over Lewis making me a hater? That's funny criteria. I respect Lewis for the things you mentioned. I also think he left the sport in a great manner - exciting slugfest with the best contender barring Tyson, Holyfield, and Bowe in the last 15 years! I'd take Vitali over Golota (nutcase), Mercer, Tua, etc. Too bad Vitali could never maintain the momentum of his 2003 fight.

 

Finally a reasonable post on this issue. Holyfield is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy OVERRATED in this forum. Lewis beat him and that's the bottom line.

 

not when you consider rahman boxed for 2 or 3 rds with an injury due to a headbutt for those scores to occur, if that had been against vitali just imagine the outcry on these boards lol. In this case everyone concedes Holyfield butted him so How can you ever call that a clear win.

 

Holyfield never fought anyone as good as Vitali in those years that people would consider his prime, Lewis beat a younger man in his prime in Vitali while himself being at his oldest and slowest, that alone counts for a lot.

 

Yes he did. He beat 1996 Tyson - who would have beaten Vitali Klitschko (please, please don't tie me up under a burning fire and put me in front of the Klitschko fanatics who will dance around in circles and chant, trying to sacrifice me to Lord Vitali ).

I do agree - that Vitali fight count for a lot (if you sacrifice me to the Klitschko fans - I'll make sure to bring back the delusional headbutt and the scorecards). I also rate Riddick Bowe over Vitali.

 

I agree with you on Holyfield. Tyson, imo, outranks Lewis slightly (#11, versus #13 for Lewis on my HW all-time list) on grounds of the dominance of his reign and because, prime for prime, he would have laid out the shaky-chinned Lewis worse than Rahman did.:yep

 

Vitali has the sway back style and height to keep out of range, he has power and chin and would beat tyson. Wlad wouldnt have a chance though.

 

20 years from now - this silly stuff will reappare. I'm gonna do this one time.

To beat Tyson - you have to outbox or outmaneuver him. Vitali is a decent boxer but he does not have the handspeed nor the fluid jab nor the infighting ability to do what Douglas did. His jab isn't going to catch Tyson like Douglas' did, which was very fast. Tyson was a quick, elusive heavyweight. Clearly Tyson can handle Vitali's power (that is if Vitali lands enough - he doesn't have a great uppercut - an important punch to beat Tyson - see the Lewis fight).

Tyson would attack Vitali's body which would slow him down. Next, Tyson certainly had the speed and lunging ability to catch Vitali. He's fought comparably tall and rangy fighters and unfortunately Vitali has yet to prove that he is a great boxer. Tyson will get past Vitali's jabs, handle the right hands of Vitali if he needs to (at his best, Tyson could indeed recover froma good punch - see vs Ruddock, Bruno, Tucker etc - Vitali didn't hit harder than these guys for 1 punch). Tyson gets in range and nails Vitai's chin with combinations.

Tyson is a proven fighter - Vitali has yet to do that. He is at best an A contenders. I see now Lewis fans are trying to make this guy Godzilla to make Lewis look good or some are just of the delusion that 6 8" Vitali cannot be reached - bollocks.

 

vitali vs. wlad is the fight i want to see, vitali all the way.
Tyson is the most overated fighter in history, the highlight reels are amazing but when you watch the full fights he had many flaws and lots of trouble against every tall guy he fought.

 

not really. in an attempt to not overrate him - people severely underrate him. LOTS OF TROUBLE? puhhhleeease. douglas and holy were the only ones to beat him - lewis got him when he was washed up so i don't count lewis loss (or include it if you wish). tyson comfortably won each decision people saying he struggled with tillis, tucker, smith etc. are ignoring all the rounds that tyson won and just focusing on a few moments. 8-4 againt tucker is not "lots of trouble". tyson beat lots of tall fighters and the one tall fighter that beat tyson was better than vitali (yeah vitali fans won't like this).

tyson vs lewis is 50/50 prime for prime, tyson vs vitali is tyson win

 

even biggs ws a struggle despite all the damage biggs endured he tied tyson up a lot and if you imagine a good fighter like vitali in that fight instead!

 

surely you're being sarcastic. so vitali ties him up. so what. that still isn't enough to stop tyson from doing what he'd do.