Please tell me why Holyfield is so highly regarded

I think he lost the 1st fight and won the second. seemed as though the judges remembered the real result of the 1st fight and gave Lewis the win he deserved for the first fight.

 

OK, but:

Buster Douglas was a shell of the fighter who beat Tyson, fat and would have been beaten by many motivated B - level fighters that night. I am pretty sure the Eddie Chambers we saw knocked out against Wlad would have won a decision against that version of Douglas.

The Tyson - win was sensational at the time, because it wasn't obvious yet how much he had lost. Tyson never beat an elite opponent afterwards.


Holyfiel LOST to Bowe twice and Bowe was good but never great. He won the rematch against Bowe by the smallest margin possible in boxing, under the most bizarre circumstances. Imagine Wlad would win a fight by one point on one card when his opponent's wife is hospitalized during the fight - the haters would go nuts!

Holyfield LOST to the in - shape version of Moorer, who wasn't even properly motivated. The fat version of Moorer was not an impressive fighter.

Foreman was a good win, but then again a lot of B - level fighters could have beaten that version of George. Morrison did, Schulz should have gotten the decision.

Rahman was a good win, but Rahman's fame is an underprepared Lennxo Lewis on a bad night.

At cruiser, Holyfielt was great. At HW, he was an incredible warrior,but never dominant, he would have never build a winning streak like Holmes or easily dominanet top opposition like Lewis.

 

easily a top ten all time heavyweight but the media especialy the ring magazine got a bit carried away by naming evander as the 3rd best heavyweight of all time after the 1st tyson fight tyson was there for the taking he had decined massively from his peak ie the spinks fight in 88 the tyson who lost to holyfield wouldnt have lasted 3 rounds against the tyson of 88

 

Douglas was iced by a single punch and the performance was flawless.

The Tyson win is sensational PERIOD!

Holyfield at 205lbs traded life and death with an inshape Bowe in one of the best battles EVER. The rematch was not as close as the judges made out and in my opinion should have been a unanimous decision for Evander. He was sick as a dog in the 3rd fight and still almost beat Bowe.

Holyfield lost to Moorer and was forced to retire due to health issues before rejuvinating his career. It could be argued that Moorer wasn't impressive in fight two but was Holyfield impressive in fight one?

The guy was a God and an established all time great. Let's drop it!

 

Ya, I know. I was full of **** earlier in this thread. Had facts from '84 and 88' all muddled together.atsch

 

I like Evander but let's not forget that he was on the Juice.

Remember Mr. Evan Fields?

 

Another good start.

Off the bat with the personal ****.


Go back and read my first post in the thread.

It was in response to an earlier post which listed Holy's notable achievements.

I responded, respectfully, without any name-calling, indicating which wins I thought were very good, which wins were good, which wins were decent and which wins were not that great.

i said **** all about anyone's mother.

I gave Holy what I consider was his fair due.

A fair opinion and one shared by many. No personal attacks on the earlier poster. Just my opinions on the points made by the earlier poster.

No. You're not saying anything. If you were, we could debate the points I made, one by one.

Instead, You just started tossing teenage insults and didn't address the points.

No. It is a statement of FACT. I never said Tyson was 'shot' or 'past it" as you stated. I said he was "past his best."

We can all have opinions and some of us even go so far as to respect other people's opinions.

But this is not even remotely open for debate. The TYson who face Holyfield was PAST HIS BEST. Everybody knows it. Tyson is on record as saying during an interview that in all of his fights post Douglas, he just didn't have the hunger anymore.

And it is well known that he had any number of mental issues during the late nineties, after his jail term, divorce etc.

So if you take that as a disrespecting of Holy, fine. It is still a FACT.


And furthermore, you KNOW very well that it it is a FACT because you stated as much in another recent thread.

It makes no difference that he was still a very capable Hwt. He was no longer the Tyson who demolished Spinks and Berbick.

That has nothing to do with whether or not Tyson had declined somewhat by the time he faced Holy.

What the **** kinda **** is this? Are you a fourteen year old ?

I'm probably old enough to be your grandaddy and have been following the sport since Tyson was a two-year-old.

Point out one thing I wrote that would point in that direction.

The only ****-chugging going on here seems to be on your part. And as I've mention to you, Holy neither needs nor wants your pre-pubescent lips near his dick.

So when I say that in my opinion, Marciano would have beaten Holy, that makes me a 'victim of nostalgia' ?

It's a reasonable opinion. Stated without rancour. Shared by many.

We can never know who would win in such a fight, for obvious reasons.

But it's pretty obvious whose doing the ball-sucking here when the very stating of an opinion that an earlier ATG might just possibly beat Holyfield gets your knickers in such a knot.

That's YOUR opinion. And your entitled to it. Mine is different. As I've stated, no one knows how such a fight would have turned out, and there is no reason to get all out of sorts when someone else sees it differently.

It's pretty ****in' clear who the pillow-biter is here, kid.

 

Couldn't be bothered responding to all this again at this point.

Read what I actually wrote first.

Just see the response to TG1.

If I've time, I'll respond later to the points you made in your other post (# 81)

BTW, Why don'y you go back in and clean it up. There are instructions somewhere on how to use the QUOTE function.

 

The guy was on steroids for most of his career

 

Iceman

I haven't got time to disect your whole post but will comment on the most important thing!

EVERYONE KNOWS THAT TYSON WAS PAST HIS BEST BUT SO WAS HOLYFIELD - SO IT EVENS ITSELF OUT! DO WE DISCOUNT FRAZIER'S WIN OVER ALI? DO WE DISCOUNT FOREMAN'S WIN OVER FRAZIER? DO WE DIMINISHISH LEONARD'S WIN OVER DURAN? Why not? All the losers WERE PAST THEIR BEST!

There is not a boxing fan on the forum who doesn't know when Tyson's peak was but a loss at 30 years of age by a 34 year old 25/1 underdog should be recognised for what it was! An absolutely astonishing victory over a potentially lethal opponent which basically ended Tyson's career!

No insults, no patronising - I can't make it plainer!

 

**** off!

Never post on here again you total and complete ****ing spastic!

 

-Olympic Gold
-Cruiserweight GOAT
-Fought everyone at heavyweight, and beat: Douglas, old Foreman, Mercer, Bowe, Tyson, Rahman, Moorer.
-Because of the wars he was in