.........I stole this idea from another site. Name the prime year (not years, just one year) for each of the following: Joe Louis Joe Frazier Alexis Arguello Azumah Nelson Oscar De La Hoya Pernell Whitaker Julio Cesar Chavez Evander Holyfield Erik Morales Marco Antonio Barrera
Joe Louis.................1939 Joe Frazier...............1971 (Easy one!) Alexis Arguello..........1975 Azumah Nelson.........1985 Oscar De La Hoya.....1995 Pernell Whitaker........1990? Julio Cesar Chavez.....? Evander Holyfield.......1988 Erik Morales..............2004. I know a lot of people won't agree with this one. Marco Antonio Barrera.?
good call on holyfield his best years were late 80s........a tyson fight should have come off in 88. Holyfield was a better heavyweight back in the 80s when he was much faster/fluid and weighing in at 200lb flat.
I think Fraziers best was 1967 he was a wrecking machine that year when he dominated george Chuvalo. He looked so fasst.
Joe Louis: 1938 Joe Frazier: 1971 Alexis Arguello: 1977 Azumah Nelson: 1984-ish Oscar De La Hoya: 1994 Pernell Whitaker: 1993 Julio Cesar Chavez: 1988 Evander Holyfield: 1989 Erik Morales: 2001 Marco Antonio Barrera: 1999
He wasn't. He struggled with Dokes and Stewart and took an age to stop Thomas and Tillis after hitting them time and time again. He was much better in 92. He just met someone bigger and stronger who punched his weight.
I rate his performance against Dokes by the way. He showed he had the mettle to compete with the top guys. But much of his pre-Douglas form didn't convince anyone he could live with Tyson.
The Dokes fight was one of his best few wins for sure. Behind Tyson and the second Bowe fight in terms of his best at HW.
Joe Louis- 1938 Joe Frazier- 1967 Alexis Arguello- 1979 Azumah Nelson- 1988 Oscar De La Hoya- 1997 Pernell Whitaker- 1989 Julio Cesar Chavez- 1987 Evander Holyfield- 1988 Erik Morales- 1999 Marco Antonio Barrera- 2000
By the way it's difficult to guage Holy's absolute best year. He was at his physical peak during the tail end of the 80's through the early 90's, but fought his best ever strategical fight later on (aged 34) when widely considered to be shot fighter and given little or no chance against his opponent. Paced himself better then too and mixed his fightplan up better than the earlier high workrate version did.
people overate the tyson win too much. tyson was completley washed up and 4 years rusted in 1996, he knocked out an ancient bruno and old seldon out of fear. The Bowe win was impressive.
I thought Tyson looked sharp vs Bruno and started of well against Holy. He was certainly differetn class even then to the Class of 88 that Evander beat.
Tyson demolished four opponents in 8 rounds, contenders all - McNeeley, Mathis, Seldon and Bruno. He was a destroyer when he met Hollyfield the first time. How was Tyson "completely washed up"?!
Mcneeley is D level at best. really that # 7 ranking he got was manufactured, Mcneeley got knocked out by butterbean for crying out loud. He boxes like a clubfighter. Mathis was not a world class fighter, not to mention he was scared to death. Bruno an aging scared to death fighter who already faced the live version of tyson and knew what was coming to him. Seldon went down without being hit, how does this even mount to a challenge? Seldon might has well not even stepped in the ring. Tyson looked way over the hill, he was very predictable, his combination punching and reflexes were long gone, His defense was non existent, his composure and ring savvy were out the window at this point. He was also rusted. didnt box once in 4 years in jail.