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.
Morrison had a broken hand in the Hipp fight and he still knocked him out. He had a broken hand in the Lewis fight as well. The fact he couldn't KO an old Foreman can't be held against him since nobody else could either. Mercer also had a titanium chin and blitzed Morrison immediately willing to eat shots in order to take him out. Pinklon Thomas was a very very durable fighter and Morrison stopped him in 1. Thomas even said Morrison hits harder than Tyson. Morrison also stopped the slick James Tillis in 1 round. He was a monstrous puncher because he produced highlight reel knockouts. I mean, have you even bothered to watch his fights? His raw power is certainly More impressive than most of Vitali's competition. And many people rate his left hook as being one of the top 10 hardest in history. As for Foreman's opponents, they have good records with or without him. That's why it's noteworthy that Foreman beat them. I don't get what's so hard to understand. Frazier was a gold medalist and had cleaned out the division and then beat Muhammad Ali, I guess that doesn't mean much? Norton was a good boxer as well with good wins over Quarry, Bobick, Young, Ali, etc. Lyle had just came off a savage KO win over Shavers. Chuvalo was a rugged tough journeyman with a concrete chin and Foreman absolutely manhandled him. It's becoming more and more obvious you just look up boxrec records and haven't watched many of these fights. I don't rate Chisora very high simply because he has a low KO% and doesn't have many kos even at the lower levels.
Interesting that you mention Foreman considering he is the only heavyweight that had success at the elite level in two totally separate eras. This suggests perhaps the 70s isn't overrated.
That isn’t true. There are plenty of heavyweights who had success in different eras. Floyd Patterson comes to mind.
Ali says 'hello' as well. Larry Holmes would tell you that, aside from his work in the 70s and 80s, his win over Mercer, along with extending Holyfield and McCall, would equal anything George did in the 90s.
The version of Pinklon Thomas that Morrison fought was far past his prime, hadn't scored a noteworthy win in years and had been stopped in 3 of his last 5 fights. So I have serious doubts as to whether this should be held up as some impressive stoppage. It was also a corner stoppage. Going into the Morrioson fight Tillis had been stopped numerous times including by the likes of Mike Williams and Johnny Du Plooy, guys not regarded as monster punchers. Tillis seemed to loose his punch resistance circa 1987. Prior to that he was hard to kayo, afterwards not so much. Morrison seems to have built up this record as a puncher in people's minds due to fighting a lot of guys who were frequently kayoed often by guys not renowned for their power and in many cases quicker than Morrison managed. I think plenty of guys could rack up impressive kayo percentages if they fought the competition Morrison fought. The original topic was how many punchers Vitali faced vis Foreman and it's worth noting that the biggest hitters he fought in the 1970s were taken out before they had a chance to land much. Frazier lasted longer in the rematch but that version of Frazier was past his best and badly overweight. I don't know if he was close to the fighter he was when he scored his best wins. He was closer to his prime in the first fight but was stopped before he could land many punches.
Morrison certainly hits harder than the likes of Chisora, adamek, Byrd, Williams, etc which are 4 of Vitali's best opponents. He is certainly better than a wheezing lethargic shot Briggs who just stood there and took a beating and is at least as good of a hitter as guys like Peter or Hide, if not better. Foreman fought a prime version of Briggs who actually hit back. In fact, Vitali's resume is very abysmal and rarely did he fight a prime ranked opponent his own size that could actually hit him back. Cavemen like Peter and Areola just kept running into his fists and took a beating, so if you want to claim Foreman took guys out before they could land much this is a funny criticism because so many of Vitali's fights were basically target practice. You can say what you want about Stewart's resume, but he had a staggering number of KOs and belted Foreman all over the face and puffed his eyes up but couldn't drop him. Foreman's chin is far more proven, that is not even up for debate. Frazier lasted 5 rounds in the rematch, you think he didn't land anything at all? Try actually watching some of these fights. Lyle landed plenty and had Foreman staggered and hurt but he got off the floor to win. Foreman ate dozens of dozens of flush right hands and combinations from Ali and didn't go down until he punched himself out in a hot outdoor arena. As for Holmes, his chin speaks for itself. Peeled himself off the canvas against Shavers, a prime Tyson needed to knock him down 3x. Took flush bombs from Snipes, Weaver, Witherspoon, etc. Also beat big sluggers like Mercer and Smith. Vitali never, ever had to actually dig deep and fight his heart out because his competition was garbage. He did show guts in the Lewis fight, but that's about it. Chin isn't just about not going down, it's about facing adversity and shaking off the cobwebs when hurt. Vitali doesn't remotely come near Foreman or Holmes in this regard.
Vitali ate bombs from Sanders and Lewis and kept fighting, and beat Chisora with a torn shoulder at about age 40. You aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
So two old fat guys who were gassed in under 8 rounds and a pressure fighter who had no real power? You are as bright as a wet match in a dark cave if you think that means his chin was tested more than Foreman and Holmes. Poll?
Aww, you’re triggered. I’m sure Lewis and Sanders would’ve rendered you unconscious in seconds if they chose to.
AwW yOu'Re TrIgGeReD. Wtf does lewis and sanders punching me, a complete nobody, have to do with the thread? What does Vitali's chin have to do with Foreman vs Holmes? You're not only wrong, you're WAY off topic.
I'm surprised No Neck seems to be letting his emotions take over his reason here, as he's capable of way more.
This is where people forget or are not aware that Foreman and Holmes were actually born in the same year, 1949 and Foreman is only about 10 months older than Holmes but Foreman developed a lot earlier and quicker than Holmes did. When George turned pro at 20 in 1969 he was already an Olympic gold medalist. A 22 year old Holmes didn’t even get past the US Olympic trials in 1972. By the time Foreman won the heavyweight title in Jan 1973, by beating Joe Frazier, he had just turned 24 years old but Larry who was 23 then was still a couple of months from making his pro debut so clearly even though there’s less than a year in age between them, Holmes developed a lot slower than George so I would have to disagree that any version of Holmes beats any version of Foreman, age for age.
