The narrative around the Bowe Holyfield trilogy seems like another example of really poor reasoning. Riddick Bowe got thrashed by Andrew Golota twice in his prime and struggled with a faded Tony Tubbs in a fight many people feel he lost. Yet somehow many people feel Holyfield beating him is an impressive achievement despite the Tubbs and Golota debacles and the fact that basically Bowes entire reputation is based on beating Holyfield due to avoiding basically nearly all of the top fighters of his era aside from Holyfield. It seems you could make a pretty strong argument that rather than evidence of Bowes greatness or proof of a great era Holyfield losing to him simply reflects badly on Holyfield. If Bowe had been around in Vitalis era and had lost to Vitali I doubt the narrative surrounding the fight would be the same.