avtually Lewis was a late bloomer, his best performance was vs Rahman in 2001, whereas Holyfild had medical problems and had taken far more punishment. Holyfield was washed up. I still give Lewis credit but indeed if Lewis was so much better, he could have crushed the small bulked up cruiserweight
Plus he probably hadn't eaten in the last few days. The Flyn loss is irrelevant if it was on the level and equaly irrelevant if it was not. Dose anybody here give Flyn any credit for this win?
I think the guys who pick Lewis to smash these smaller guys don't take Lewis' sometime mental deficiencies into account. If we look at the first round of Lewis-Tyson, an over the hill Tyson wins it, he bullies Lewis a little bit with aggression. Now Lewis also sets the tone for the win, he hits Mike with two cracking uppercuts and takes all the startch out of him - the old Tyson realises then that the job is to hard. But a peak Dempsey against even a peak Lewis is a live fight IMO. As far as my top five goes (Ali, Louis, Liston, Lewis, Johnson) i'm happy to pick the other four over Dempsey, that is not hard for me, but I give Dempsey a real live chance v Lewis - Lewis may even be made for him.
He's an example of someone who's come from a lighter weight to become an ATG in modern heavyweight boxing, so the comparison is valid.
Because Holyfield was 215lbs of ripped to the bone muscle with less bodyfat than dempsey. How do you know Holyfield didn't hit harder than Dempsey/Marciano - he was after all in with bigger more skilled opposition. If your calling Holyfield a cruserweight because he was once 190lbs does that mean Dempsey is a light heavyweight because he started at 170lbs?
Holyfield was a cruiser when he was an adult. Dempsey was a light-heavy when he was an underfed teen. Holyfield was also a light-heavy as a teen, he competed in the Olympics as a light-heavy
Yet its ok that Bert Sugar has the similarly accomplished Tunney in his top10 :rofl Do you have a top25 McGrain? I made a top100 a year ago but need to change quite a few names around
I think you are close to spot on, though Dempsey may not have had a better chin (marginal). My point is, if this is the case, what huge advantages are left for the bigger guys? If they are not more powerful, if they are not more resistant to big punchers, what is their real advantage? Lewis is an example of a fighter who is very very good at being big, he uses his size well. Dempsey is a fighter with wonderful rythym breaking head movement. Both of these factors are just stylistic factors to be solved. They aren't deal-breakers, either of them.
My point is that he was saying that evander was a simular size to dempsey and marciano as comparison when he was clealry alot bigger.
Dempsey was 6'1 with a 77 inch reach, same as Holyfield. So evender took drugs and was 20 lb heavier, not such a huge deal, Dempsey could have done it too.
Does seem excessive... A hundred is an impressive thing. I haven't been past 20. If I try to go any further than that it gets all mushy.