Okay, difference in opinion, i don't think we're going to work this one out. I think Lewis' win over Golota is better than Holyfield's over Douglas, because: 1) Douglas showed zero interest in winning the fight, he was basically just picking up a paycheck 2) Golota, while also raking up a share of losses, would go on to have very close fights, in many people's opinion even wins, over beltholders in 2004 against Byrd and ruiz. Douglas did nothing of note after the Holyfield defeat. 3) Golota was in top shape, while Douglas was 20 lbs overweight, which signifies point 1). I do agree, however, that the Douglas win for Holyfield is often overlooked. In trouble? He avenged that loss by spectacular KO, destroyed the heir apparant in Grant, masterfully outboxed Tua and beat the future linear champion in Vitali Klitschko, something only a few men in the entire history of boxing have done. How does that compare to Holyfield losing one-sided to Byrd, getting knocked out by a fat former middleweight in Toney, going even with Ruiz and losing another one-sided decision to Larry Donald? To be fair, he did head-butt Rahman into submission. Rahman's should-be win over Tua (arguably two) are better than anything Moorer has ever done outside of the Holyfield win. How long did he last against Tua again?
This is where I see differences and will probably get myself into trouble, but oh well. CP I think Lewis' win over Golota is better than Holyfield's over Douglas, because: 1) Douglas showed zero interest in winning the fight, he was basically just picking up a paycheck So did Golota really, in fact he didnt even want to fight at all. They had a hard time getting him to come out of his dressing room. 2) Golota, while also raking up a share of losses, would go on to have very close fights, in many people's opinion even wins, over beltholders in 2004 against Byrd and ruiz. Douglas did nothing of note after the Holyfield defeat. He lost pretty one sided to Ruiz and I believe the Byrd fight could have gone either way even though officially a draw. Douglas was an established fighter with an already long career, whereas Golota had just emerged as a young top contender. 3) Golota was in top shape, while Douglas was 20 lbs overweight, which signifies point 1). Douglas was in poor physical shape but Golota was in very poor mental shape. Who showed more desire to fight? Douglas went three rounds, Golota went one, both could have gotten up, neither chose to. Douglas was coming off of soundly beating Mike Tyson and knocking him out. Golota was coming off of two losses to Riddick Bowe (who some felt was far past his best, myself included), where he showed clear mental breakdowns in both fights. As far as Tua and Rahman, how did Rahman argueably win the first fight? He was stopped in the fight, although the punch from the previous round that ultimately hurt Rahman badly, was considered a little late by the Rahman corner. Tua had a history of stopping guys like Maskaev and Izon late after being behind on the cards, and he was catching up to Rahman.
Holyfield didn't duck him in 1994. Holyfield was mandated to defend the IBF title against Moorer or being stripped. Holyfield honoured the mandate, he didn't want to end up with one belt when originally he'd had three ! (when he beat Douglas) Where's the evidence Holyfield ducked him in 1996-'98 either ? Just because Lewis whines about the fact that the fights aren't happening doesn't automatically mean everything has to be lumped on the other fighter/promoters ! Show me the evidence and I'll accept it. Mason aint in any respectable top 5 in 1991, or ever. As much as I liked Mason and wish he'd be remembered more, he didn't have any wins to put him among the top 5 heavyweights of the time. Top 15, yeah. Maybe top 9 or 10 if you're super-generous. No dispute. I know 1993 was horrendously weak as far as depth of opposition goes but it's a stretch to elevate Bruno to the top 4. Who had Bruno beat since losing to Tyson in 1989 ? I suppose you could say a win over Pierre Coetzer, but I cant remember Bowe getting much credit for that from you. I dont know. Since beating Foreman, Morrison had been blasted out by Michael Bentt in 1 round ! And got a gift against Ross Purrity. And Ruddock was no longer a viable top 10 contender. The rest of the winning run is over tomato can-types in Oklahoma City. Stop with the Tommy Morrison bull****, people. Possibly. But probably not. Holyfield's barely in the top 5 at this time, by reasonable standards. Until he comes back later in the year against Tyson. I rated Moorer above Golota at that time. I rated Mercer above Golota too. Fighters who seemingly almost deliberately lose fights by DQ with brutal fouls dont deserve to be ranked that high. A good fighter. Yeah, top 10. But a bum performance. i saw him do the same thing about 10 years earlier in the ABA finals. Top 10, maybe, yes. Not at all. Seen as easy pickings for George Foreman's farewell bum-a-month tour, more like. And his performance against Foreman didn't improve his status much either. I wouldn't even say Foreman and Briggs even make the top 10 heavyweights in the world at the time. Holyfield was number 1 or 2. I agree. Hyped as number 2 to Lennox, maybe. But Holyfield had just fought a close competitive 12 rounder with Lewis, Tua was around. Ike Ibeabuchi was not yet in jail. Grant had struggled to beat Golota, who just seemed to quit. It was an insult to be putting Grant above those others. Yes. But that's not necessarily a totally positive reflection on Lewis. It resonates a bit with Ali's "legendary third world title" beating Leon Spinks. Tyson had beat Golota 20 months earlier. And Golota was already a discredited contender. Since the Golota win, Tyson had been in the ring once, and weighed a whopping 239 pounds and fought like a plodder against fat boy Brian Nielsen. The Tyson hype was bull****. Holyfield, Ruiz, Byrd are just 3 who deserved to be ranked above him. Klitschkos and Tua maybe too. Not a great champion. But perhaps top 3 at that time. I count it a bit different. But close. I think some of the guys rated as top 5 and top 6 etc. are quite wrong really too. Still, his record is very good, as is Holyfield's.
1. I suppose thats fair, put it this way though Lewis was dying for his shot at the top Americans from 91-99, he was mandated too in '92, no one would fight him, they took optional defenses, threw belts away, Lewis was a hell of allot of risk but a decent reward. Holyfield was probably the only 1 with the balls to fight him, but he kept losing, except for 96-99 when he went after Moorer/BEan instead of Lewis 2. Mason was 35-0 and beat some decent fringe contenders 3. Bruno was a top HW for nearly a decade and had numerous good wins, yes Coetzer was his best recent win and yes he did it as emphatically as Bowe who got ranked top3 off that win alone. Brunos only loss in 7years came to Tyson and Bruno tested him more than most had. Who do you rate in front of Bruno is '93 given Rudduck left, you dont rank Morrison, Mercer just lost etc 4. Bit of a fluke loss the Bentt 1, he still has the win over linear champ Foreman within 2 years. I take you dont rate Cotto at this moment at WW given he lost 2 fights ago? Didnt think so 5. So you dont think Mercer is top6? Whos in your top6 given you dont rate Morrison/Golota? 6. Come on Moorer had just been sparked by a fat 45yo who had no good wins Moorer aside and got schooled by Morrison who you dont rate, either Morrison is top5 for beating Foreman or Moorer isnt you cant have it both ways. Mercer didnt even fight in '97 and has no notable wins after the Lewis/Holyfield losses 7. Akiwande just did what Ruiz does every fight and hes better than Ruiz for that matter, regardless he was WBO champ and top10 for the past 2 years 8. Bare in mind Lewis showed a champions heart rematching McCall too, he didnt know McCall was going to start crying 9. Both are probably top10, Briggs had an exciting style and was a big hitter, plus at the end of the day he had the linear title, whether you think he was good or not 10. I'd say he proved to be not no1 :yep 11. Wow 12. Well we know he was hailed the Heir Apparent, HBO believed it, he was a athletic fast 6'8 big puncher and he managed to hurt Lewis too in a dog fight. For all we know he might have been good but got ruined by Lewis, he took a brutal beating in that 1 and his chin didnt look glass taking those shots. If he got Ruiz/Byrd instead he would have likely beat them. Ibeaubuchi was on his way to jail at this stage, Tua had got shut out, Holy had just got solidly beaten by Lewis. 13. Rahman gets a tad underrated he was certainly a level above Spinks, and achieved as much as Moorer at HW. He got his title shot by beating Prime Sanders who would beat Wlad and test Vitali. He later deserved a win against Tua. Lewis would have beaten Rahman if it wasnt at altitude or he spent time ad******g to altitude anyway 14. Come on Tyson would have blown Ruiz and Byrd out even if he was past prime, neither do a single thing better than him and Holyfield was picking up losses. The performance against Golota was a good 1, Golota would go on to deserve decisions over both Ruiz and Byrd getting jobbed in both. Saverese wasnt great but he took Grant the full 10, went to an SD against Foreman. Plus TYson did actually put a concerted camp into beating Lewis and showed better head movement than he did against Holyfield years earlier 15. Many are rating him top20 or top15 of all time already, hes also a hard 1 to fight, I think hes a lock for top20 when alls said and done so at near 38 a high note for Lewis to go out on
Golota showed us nothing. That's silly. You mean to say we had to wait until 2004 to assess the worth of Lewis-Golota aginst Holyfield-Douglas ? And somehow close fights 7 years later with Byrd and Ruiz validate the statement that "Lewis KO1 Golota > Holyfield's win over Tyson-conqueror and undisputed champion Douglas" ! Gimme a break. That's ridiculous. Douglas was 14 or 15 pounds heavier than he's been against Tyson, and about 3 or 4 pounds heavier than he'd been against Oliver McCall (who he beat) in his fight previous to Tyson. He was much too heavy, yes. The heaviest he'd been in years. But a physically "in-shape" Golota is not necessarily fit to win anything. Maybe he just likes to lose in shape. Douglas was coming off a much bigger win than anything you can attribute to Golota ever. I mean, let's even pretend he won the Bowe fights - which he didn't. You dont even rate Bowe anywhere near Tyson. It's criminally underrated when people are seriously saying Lewis KO1 Golota outranks it. Golota had crumbled twice in his only two big fights to date, and - if you really want to discuss "future events" - was to quit similarly in his next two big fights (Grant and Tyson) after the Lewis non-performance. Douglas had just showed the world he could win a big fight, possibly the biggest upset ever, one of the biggest wins in heavyweight history. Was undisputed heavyweight champion. Sure, we can call him a lazy champion who lost heart and gained weight, and that he diminished himself for his first defence from what he was in his title-winning effort. But that's nothing compared to what we know about Golota. There's no case for Golota being rated as you seem to. Like beating Bowe up and getting DQ'd twice in a row makes him a better opponent to beat than the man who just smashed King Kong up in Tokyo. You gonna have to pull some weird logical somersaults and biased reasoning to really convince yourself of that one. Good luck. Does that really make the loss worth it ? Maskaev had a better idea. Fight Rahman twice, KO him twice. I thought Rahman's KO of Lewis was quite spectacular too. I love the "heir apparent" thing. Heir apparently not, more like. Great win. :good Klitschko wasn't linear champion. He didn't beat the man who beat the man, and he didn't lose either. So there's no line. I dont count fights that happen after the fighter is at the top of the game, as champion or real close to the top. Losses to Toney and Donald and Byrd can all be discounted. The Ruiz fights are less clear. I mean, I want to give Lennox Lewis a decent amount of credit for beating Holyfield, so I dont want to say Holyfield was TOTALLY SHOT for Ruiz' just a year or so later. But then again, Ruiz actually floored and hurt Holyfield quite badly in the 2nd fight and that reflects quite badly on Lewis if Holyfield was about the same fighter. Seeing as Lewis couldn't floor Holyfield in 24 rounds. It's a hard one. I dont want to give Ruiz too much credit and I dont want to diminish Lewis. How do you see it ? Anyway, i wasn't seriously suggesting Holyfield did anything in 2000-03 to rival Lewis, apart from maybe ..... ...... but then Holyfield was fighting good and ranked heavyweights in 1988 and 1989, on the other side of the 90s. On pure accomplishments, they are very close. Moorer has some good accomplishments. But I wont even bother going into it. Because as I said before, Holyfield losing a razor-close decision (could easily have gone his way) to a lesser fighter is not as bad as getting KO'd early by a lesser fighter. Somehow you dont agree, so we'll leave it at that.
"Heir apparently not" Probably the best description of Grant. I really wonder how much money HBO invested in him leading up to the Lewis fight?
There were some good heavyweights around at the time though, so it was nowhere near enough to make the world's top 5. And I'd say the same thing about George Foreman going in to the Holyfield fight around the same time. Many have criticized Foreman's opposition coming in to that fight, and he didn't deserve top 5 either. I agree, it's a rough year. The Lewis-Bruno fight happened before Morrison lost to Bentt and after Morrison beat Foreman, so maybe Morrison could arguably be ranked above Bruno. I mean, between the Foreman and Bentt fights is easily Morrison's career-high, and it wasn't very high and I'd favour Bruno. Yes, Bruno might even be justifiable at number 4. I mean, who else is there in mid-'93 ? Holmes, Moorer, Tucker, Jesse friggin' Ferguson ! Yep, I might even be swayed. Well, I wouldn't rank Foreman going in to the Moorer fight, and just because he beat Moorer doesn't mean that Tommy Morrison should enter the ratings ! Cotto just beat Clottey. Look, what the **** had Tommy Morrison done since beating Foreman ? We've already covered it. He got blasted by Bentt, got a disputed draw gift with unranked Ross Purrity and has one meaningful comeback win over Ruddock, who was an ex-contender. Again, I stand corrected. Tyson, Bowe, Lewis and Holyfield would make up my top 4 going in to May 1996. And then Mercer had only Botha and Witherspoon, maybe Bruce Seldon shock to duke out the remaining two places. Or Foreman if you like ! But, no, I think that Mercer is a fair shout for the top 6. He wouldn't be lower than 7 anyway. That's not how ratings work. It's not what happened five or six fights ago that determines where a person is ranked. You need to study the timeline. Moorer lost to Foreman in November 1994, but we are talking about his ranking as of October 1997 (the time of Lewis-Golota). Moorer has beaten Botha and Schulz since losing to Foreman. Schulz had been robbed against Foreman so was ranked, Botha was ranked because he had beaten Schulz (but stripped because of failing steroids test). So, Moorer basically beat two guys who should have been rated above Foreman ! If the abscence of Foreman's willingness for a rematch, what more can Moorer do ? Moorer had also beaten an unranked but undefeated Vaughn Bean, a decnt filler fight. And held the IBF title. As for Morrison, for the zillionith time, I dont give a **** about whether or not he's top 5 or top 10 or top 100 in the wake of his win over Foreman, but whatever he was he had sure as hell dropped when he got blasted by Bentt and drew with Purrity. And beating the ex-contender Ruddock did not make him top 5 for the fight with Lewis ! It's very simple. You know how legitimate ratings should work. And as for Mercer, as of October 1997 he hadn't fought for EXACTLY the same period of time as Golota ! They fought on the same bill, with Mercer winning against the ranked comebacking Witherspoon, and Golota LOSING again to Bowe. Grant didn't impress much against Golota, and you're continuing to over-rate him. Yeah, he was a worthy enough challenger, and Lewis-Holyfield 3 was never gonna appeal much so I see why they hyped him, but there's not much to say on Grant. Tua got his chance at Lewis after Grant. He was way more legit though, and should be rated higher. With all due respect ...... what a load of bull**** ! There's no proof whatsoever that Tyson could beat any top 5 heavyweight after 1996/'97. Holyfield would have kicked his ass to pieces in 2002. Chris Byrd would have probably befuddled him and made him quit after 9 or 10 rounds. Rahman, Ruiz, Klitschkos, Tua, any of them. Golota and Savarese ? Whatever, but even then Tyson clearly deteriorated when he took 12 months off after the Golota win and came back at 239 against Nielsen. 2001/'02 Tyson was even worse than the guy who fought Golota, and there's no proof that the one who beat Golota was capable of beating one of the legit top guys.
The RING magazine annual ratings - which I certainly dont consider definitive - but are USUALLY a fair indication of where fighters were rated when, confirm what I say about Golota and Moorer. And I have several magazines and various ratings from 1996 and 1997 and haven't seen any where Golota gets rated up the top 3 for being DQ once and then twice against Bowe. I mean, I'm not saying all ratings are fair or that they weren't biased or based on hype and **** too, but I think all reasonable minds had Golota rated about the same. Maybe the hype accelerated and went stupid when Lewis signed to fight him on HBO PPV, I dont know. But it's pure revisionism to act like he was rated higher than Moorer in late '97. Before OR after their fights with Lewis and Holyfield respectively. End of 1996 RING ratings : [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] [url] This content is protected [/url] Not a bad list. Like I said, I might have Mercer ahead of Golota then and up until October 1997 (since neither did anything in the meantime).
I think the Tyson Lewis beat was better than the 1 who beat Golota, mainly because Tyson actually trained and wasnt high (thats why it was changed to an NC). The Golota Tyson beat went onto beat Byrd/Ruiz (didnt get the decision but all the same). What are Ruiz/Byrd going to do to Tyson? They sure as **** arent going to outspeed him, they havent got the chins to take the early fire power, they havent got the power to get his respect. Styles make fights and Tyson matches up well against them both even this Tyson. What about Tyson-Wlad? Wlad lost to a fat past prime Sanders in 2003 who wasnt in the same league as even that Tyson. We know Wlad shits it against punchers with speed and pressure, nightmare fight for him this 1. Is Rahmans chin/ going to survive the early Tyson onslaught? Tua is an inferior boxer, shorter (Tyson would be the tall man ) but closer to his prime, although he was actually faded himself at this stage. Vitali would probably beat Tyson by this stage but Tyson would land on his hands down defense early and test his chin more than an old Lewis managed.
Some claim The Ring to be biased towards AMerican fighters, I think Moore-Golota are pretty inexchangable, and some thought Golota better than Holyfield given Bowe beat Holy and Golota retired Bowe. I'm not sure if Tyson should be in the rankings given he was banned at the time. Like I say many claimed he was number 1 in the world back in '96-'97, imagine the fuss there would be on the general forum after Bowe-Golota, if they said Vitali was robbed they'd certainly say the same about Golota, consider him as the winner of the event over arguably the number 1 HW
Tyson was photographed during his training camp for Lewis smoking pot on the beach in Hawaii. Lewis beat a better Tyson?? HMM Tyson fought five or six times in a two year period, as compared to the year off he took before returning to the ring to face Nielson (after Golota) at a whopping 239 pounds. He then faced Lewis 8 months later. Ruiz beat Golota. Byrd in my opinion deserved to lose, but really meaningless nonetheless.
Holyfield, Rahman, Byrd and Ruiz would probably have beat tyson in 2002, in my opinion. At least 3 of them deserved to be ranked above him too. Really, your points aren't based on much reality. Tyson was in crap shape for the Lewis fight and hadn't beat a true top 10 fighter since 1996 ! Face it. He was a joke throughout 2001 and early 2002, a bizarre circus, and Lewis was probably right when he said Tyson was trying to sabotage the fight. In the end Tyson had no choice but to fight for the big money, but he was even on prescription psychoactive drugs, nevermind smoking weed. You can say all you want about what 2002 Tyson would do to Rahman, Byrd, Ruiz or Wlad, I'm not convinced at all. He might beat Danny Williams.
Its needless to say that Mike Tyson was beyond shot by 2002. For years, trainers and writers had reported that Tyson had basically stopped training for fights, and Mike even commented on it himself in his latest documentary. Additionally, even though he was one year younger than Lewis, his physical attributes and style were of the variety that awarded being a young man in his prime, and not a fighter approaching middle age. If we look back on history, other swarmers who fought in a crouching stance such as Rocky Marciano, Joe Frazier and few others were not exactly standing on top of the world in their late 30's. In fact, they were all retired.
I'd say Ruiz and Byrd would have offered stronger challenges than a fighter like Mike Grant to an older Tyson. They both could make you look pretty bad with their styles, and had proven so against some of the top contenders like Kirk Johnson, Rahman, Golota, Tua, Oquendo and even Holyfield.
The Ring magazine ratings are dead wrong and biased on occasions, but Golota just didn't deserve to be ranked 1, 2 or 3 in 1996 or 1997. These ratings are from end of 1996, after both the Bowe-Golota fights but before Tyson got banned, so maybe Golota moves up after the bite fight. "Golota retired Bowe" doesn't wipe away the fact that he threw away two fights against Bowe. He was lucky to get ranked at all, he was a master at finding a way to lose. He wasn't better than Holyfield, esp. after what Holyfield did to Tyson. I'm actually feeling a bit sick talking so much about Golota. Like I said before, he showed a good degree of ability and was certainly a dangerous challenger to Lewis in 1997, and NO ONE can fault Lewis's devastating performance. But that's where it ends. The question marks about Golota were answered. And the answer wasn't pretty.
