Most impressive regaining of the title, , ali v foreman or holyfield V tyson?

Good question. Perhaps Holy, since he was an even bigger underdog than Ali.

 

Foreman was in his absolute prime and he was considered unbeatable when he fought an old Ali in 74. Very few gave Ali any chance including Cosell. Many felt Ali may be seriously injured. Yet Ali knocked Foreman out for a ten count.

 

Foreman/Ali ... Holyfield was certainly weathered going into the fight, but Tyson's opponents leading up to their meeting - with the exception of Bruno - were subpar, and some of Tyson's aura of invincibility was weakened by his loss to Douglas and years of incarceration. Foreman was undefeated and had annihilated two top-tier fighters who'd beaten Ali. Vegas odds for both fights day-of were relatively close (reports vary, but one site stated Ali was 3-1 against, while Holyfield was 5-1), but the consensus was more overwhelmingly against Ali (there were rumors - unconfirmed - that Herbert had offered $$$ to the referee to stop the bout if it looked like Ali was in danger of getting beaten badly). Taking absolutely nothing away from Evander, who fought a brave, smart fight - but Tyson was already sliding downhill.

 

Foreman/Ali a big one for sure. Ali was a whole different fighter from his 1964 version. HOLYFIELD was a big underdog because we didn't know what we know now about Tyson. At that time we didn't know Tyson would fold under pressure. So Holyfield/Tyson is just about as big as Foreman/Ali.

 

Need to put this in context.

Ali going into the bout with Foreman had just beaten both Frazier and Norton and was 13-1 since losing to Frazier in 1971. Ali was also former hwt champion of the world. Ali was no doubt the No 1 contender for Foremans title.

All this and he was still a 3-1 underdog going into this fight.

I do not think any hwt champion was as highly regarded as unbeatable in boxing history as was Foreman in 74 prior to fighting Ali.

 

Excellent thread and a very thought provoking question. Both wins were magnificent in their own ways and my view is that Ali/Foreman was the greater victory but Holyfield/Tyson was the bigger upset. My rationale is as follows

Foreman was not only unbeaten at the time of meeting Ali but considered unbeatable - A cross between Joe Louis and Sonny Liston according to a lot in the know at the time. There were quite a few,though,who picked Ali to prevail with confidence as there was a school of thought that if Muhammad was still in there fighting after five rounds,George would start to lose confidence in his power. Ali was in excellent shape and apart from his losses to Ken Norton and Joe Frazier taken little punishment in the ring.

N.B. I've always found the fears for Ali's health in the lead up a little over the top. Frazier,Roman and Norton were perfectly ok after being stopped by George.


Evander Holyfield in 1996 was quite a battered warrior and looked unimpressive coming into the Tyson fight having lost the rubber match to Riddick Bowe and looking unconvincing in his winning fight after that. Tyson,although no longer having that aura of indestructability prior to 1990 looked quite impressive beating Frank Bruno and Bruce Seldon. He was a bigger betting favourite than Foreman was.

 

With hindsight it's Ali-Foreman but in 'When We Were Kings' you see sportswriters' predictions and quite a few went for Ali. At the time, ab Ali victory was considered unlikely but not inconceivable.

Only Ron Borges plumped for Evander in 96. The Ring even went for a first round defeat so in real time, ie how we viewed the result at fight time, that was the more incredible result. It only becomes less incredible when you saw how Evander went on after that fight to beat Tyson again and to give Lewis a world of trouble at 37. It also becomes less incredible when Tyson was revealed to have slipped so far. But these deficiencies hadn't been exposed by the likes of Seldon or Big Frank. In November 96 we still believed he had retained much of what made him so feared.

Evander beat a shot Tyson when he - Holyfield - wasn't as far gone as we had feared. Ali beat a prime Foreman. For my money, it was the most amazing performance ever in a heavyweight title fight.

 

Another issue however is the question posed. Foreman was THE worlds undefeated hwt champion when Ali knocked him out.

Tyson was NOT the title holder when Holy beat him in November of 1996. Foreman had beaten Moorer in 1994 and held that title until Briggs beat him in 1997. Lewis then beat Briggs for the title. Etc.

 

Really not true. Every fighter has a fan base who will think he will win no matter the circumstances. Overwhelmingly the populous did not give Ali a chance. Yes many felt Ali, an old Ali, could get seriously injured. Cosell, Ali's greatest supporter, thought the worst going into this fight.

 

Ali-Foreman
Foreman-Moorer
Holyfield-Tyson
but....
to me, the most impressive regaining of the heavyweight title was the first time that this was done...that being Patterson-Johansson 2

 

That's true but it is equally true that a sizeable pocket of writers picked Ali. It was not a massive minority of deluded Ali diehards. It's on 'When We Were Kings'; there's a scene where a scrap of paper is shown polling the writers. It's nearly 50-50. I didn't make it up. I remember it surprised me. I wasn't around for the Rumble so I had always believed Ali had overcome enormous odds which is how it has been reported since.

Borges, however, was one in 43 writers polled who picked Evander. In terms of how the result was viewed by the contemporary boxing world, this fight created the biggest shock.

 

Holyfield was a disgrace against Tyson.

Ali easily.