The Holyfield who was given a controvertsial Draw against a peak Lewis in 1999 vs teh Holmes who gave a Peak Holyfield a hard fight And cut him in 1992. Stats - Holyfield 1999 [Lewis 1 fight version] This content is protected This content is protected Age - 37 Weight - 215lbs Height - 6'2 Reach - 78" VS. Holmes 1992 [Holyfield-fight version] This content is protected This content is protected Age - 42 Weight - 233lbs Height - 6'3 Reach - 81" Who wins?? - You decide... :bbb
Holmes by UD. 1999 Holyfield wouldn't deal so well with Larry's jab as he did 7 years earlier. He wasn't that dynamic and fast anymore, couldn't keep that incredible pace that he applied when he was younger. I scored Holmes-McCall fight 115-113 Holmes and Larry did all that thanks to his ubelivable jab.
I like McCall but he was raw and outboxed by Holmes. It was skills and smarts against power. Holmes was rocked late by McCall and gave away last rounds and looked in trouble. But overall I wouldn't say that Atomic Bull looked great. I had it: Holmes - McCall 1 10-9 2 10-9 3 9-10 4 10-9 5 10-9 6 10-9 7 10-9 8 10-9 9 9-10 10 9-10 11 9-10 12 9-10 115-113 Holmes
Old Holmes was not stopped or dropped in any fight he had in 1991-2002 And in those 11 years, 24 fights - he fought Huge-Punchers Mercer, McCall + Smith, so why did someone vote for Holyfield KO or TKO?? I want them to plz explain how Old Holyfield who fights in spurts And was never a puncher would stop Holmes. IMO this fight has to end by decision. :bbb
Holmes takes it on points. a prime Holyfied beat a 42 year old Holmes in '92,on speed,and workrate. By the time Evander fought Lewis,he'd slowed considerably. Holmes would have been able to slow the fight down.
Old Holyfield by KO/TKO. Evander didn't take Holmes even half as serious as he did Lewis. Holmes, even old Holmes, should take his loss against a thoroughly disinterested/uninspired Holyfield and be happy with it. Incidentally, that Lewis that Old Holyfield fought would also KO/TKO '92 Holmes.
I agree that Lewis beats Holmes , his right hand would be a nightmare for Holmes but no way does Holyfields KO Holmes. Its a points win , dont know who to Larrys jab would probably win it for him.
Holmes' jab against Holyfield in '92 was non-existent. That was a ****-poor offensive display by Holmes that night. He fought in spurts, layed against the ropes, shucked and jived, and made Holyfield look awkward simply because he (Holmes) fought such a safety-first fight. The fight would have been a lot more competitive if it were a '99 Holyfield in the ring, but Holmes would still probably lose.
Those who picked Holyfield via KO or TKO need to explain why Holyfield in his prime could not finish an older Holmes. to pick the 1999 Holyfield to win via TKO / KO does not make any sense. I get the hunch people have misread the poll. Holyfield in 1999 wasn't stopping anyone, and would not stop the Holmes of 1992. I think the 1992 Holmes wins a decision over the 1999 Holyfield.
:good Seeing that surprised me as well. You're right - they must have misunderstood and thought "Holyfield vs. Holmes in 1999". That's the only way it makes sense. :think
