Was reading up on Archie Moore about how he came up the hard way, sometimes early in his career fighting for food. Took him 15 years to get a title shot. Tyson had opportunities Moore would've killed to have in his career. Right out of the gate Tyson had top notch professional management who knew how to market him, how to bring him along and how to get him a title shot. Tyson had it easy compared to many other fighters and not just in terms of talent, he originally had a team around him that was dedicated to making him successful.
By that time, IMO, it was Holyfields fight to lose. He hypothetically could have out boxed Tyson in 1991, but before the Bowe loss, he wasn't shy about trading punches with a naturally bigger man. And Tyson still had the handspeed to match Holyfield. If Holyfield would fight Tyson in 91 like I think he would have, I have to go with Tyson.
I agree they were both better in 91. Especially Tyson but Holyfield was also better, he was quicker and threw more combinations. Oddly I do believe that he gained some things as an aging fighter that helped him deal with Mike Tyson`s style. Holyfield got bigger and stronger, he started fighting like a heavyweight boxer rather than what he was in his prime {he fought like a smaller fighter}. Evander didn't waste as much energy ripping those 5 and 6 punch combos. He sat down on his punches more an he adopted a few rough tactics on the inside. I don't think Tyson would have been pushed back by Holyfield in 1991. Watch the Bert Cooper fight. I do think Holyfield was mentally tougher and could dig deep while Tyson is a question mark. Not that clear cut to me even though I would have to bet on Evander if nailed down. Tyson may have still been to physically strong and explosive and maybe it doesn't come down to heart and guts.