If we can agree that Holy wasn't in his "prime" when he fought Lewis, then let's discuss who would win this Prime vs. Prime matchup. My avatar and top ten HW rankings give a clue to who I think would win, but I would like to see what other ESB Classic posters think. Thanks!
I agree that Holyfield was slightly past his prime for the Lewis' matches. I also think Lewis was begining to slow down a little too by the time these matches were made, but still consider him in his prime because Lewis proved to be excellent well in to the 00's. What Lewis lost in speed in the late 90's was balanced by what he gained in wisdom. Holyfield would need a TKO to win. The trouble is, Holyfield was never a right hand bomber which is the best way to beat Lewis. I think Lewis superior power, height reach, and cautious style earns him a points win if they fought in their primes.
Lewis would always give Holyfield problems. A prime Holyfield is a little more active and maybe forces Lewis to fight more, but its still hard to say exactly who would win. Holyfield would certainly get to Lewis more, but he doesnt punch as hard, and Lewis at his best was very hard to hit cleanly. I think this is always a bad fight for Holyfield stylistically.
I co-sign. But I tend to think that Lewis wins this match up anytime after 1995-1996. Had they fought in 1992-1994 I would give Evander the edge on the basis that Lewis is still underdeveloped.
I think the 2nd Lewis fight showed Holyfields best form in years but he still lost, Lewis wasnt a sgood as in the first fight. A early to mid nineties clash would have the same result. By the time they did fight Lewis had slowed down a lot also.
For what it's worth, I think a prime Holy wins a close fight based on his aggression and combination punching. LL tends to fight defensively and a Prime Holy would have been able to get inside more and but more combos together. LL would have two choices when Holy got inside, stand and bomb away with a bomber or back up and jab. If he did the first, I think Holy was better at it. Holy would inflict more damage through back and forth action. If LL chose the second, he'd have a better shot (it's what he did in the 2nd fight) but Holy would be too busy. If you watch the second LL fight, Holy had the perfect game plan but did not have the juice to keep up the pressure and throw more punches when he needed to. LL was a great champion, but I do believe he is a bit overrated based on him beating Holy and Tyson. Holy and Tyson were clearly NOT in their primes when they fought, and Holy actually fought a very close fight the second time. LL was a late bloomer really and fought much better under Manny Steward than he did when he was younger. Just my opinion.
well in 1999....lewis barely sqeezed by 37 yr old holy.......if holy was 4 yrs younger prime 4 prime ...........................EVANDER HOLYFIELD VIA 12 RD DEC....65 %
My thoughts exactly. It's more of a style issue than anything else. Lewis had the style to give Holyfield problem's whenever they fought, assuming both were relatively experienced. Didn't realize until after I posted this, how old this thread it, it's old enough that I replied to Lefthook's comments twice.
I like Holyfield by a close decision, assuming that the 1989-1992 version showed up... Lewis was peak when they fought, whereas as Evander was years past his best...