Good day. Happy New Year to everyone I wish! All of us remember many disputes (all over the world) on Tyson and Lewis's theme who from them is greater or more legendary, and many other things. At present it is represented to me interesting to discuss "face to face" Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield, to discuss them not from the point of view of statistics and figures, titles, belts, comparison of opposition or records. To me interestingly what they were as boxers, are how much good or bad, than are good and than are not so good. As to Mike in its best years, I saw in him very good aggressive shorty counterpuncher. With fine technics and skills, feeling of a distance and a rhythm in actions, fine feeling of the opponent. His technics and skills were almost ideally combined with his natural parametres. Then in due course Mike became easier, also more predicted, but on any very long remained terrible force. Holyfield in cruiserweight and times of heavyweight differed a little. Despite the universality and brilliant skills being cruiser he didnt hesitate to impose to contenders rate and without ceremony could break them physically, many times taking fight inside. Passing in heavyweight to him it was necessary to calm the passion though, but all the same there was an aspiration to combat "a bone in a bone" a little if it is most favourably for him. They in a ring met twice, and both times the victory remained beyond Evander. The fact is also that in the second fight they have a little held back each other. I saw their career of professional boxers from beginning to end, and I dare to assert that in their fight in any years, taking into account their styles, merits and demerits, Evander it would appear more strongly and beat Mike any time, any place, anywhere. What opinions are?
Tyson's skill set was vastly superior to anything in Holyfield's arsenal. It's a crying shame that the once Iron Mike lost his way and his abilities in fairly swift fashion.
Evander -easily:deal he beat Tyson 2x, beat better fighters and had more longevity, and most importantly fought with MORE HEART:yep...
No it wasnt Holyfield at his best had far better skils than Mike Tyson, Mike only knew one way to fight, and that was to come forward, Holyfield could both fight and Box when it came down to it.
Evander Holyfield. Best cruiserweight ever, better wins at hw, 2-weight champion, greater longevity. All-round the greater fighter IMO, although Tyson was a better hw h2h.
I think the 1st fight between them settled this question for us. Commander Vander was a vastly superior fighter compared to Tyson in terms of both skill and all-time greatness.
That first fight was something wasnt it? I mean heavyweights do not fight like that anymore these days, Holyfield fought Mike and beat Mike at his own game, he used Mikes style to find holes in Mikes Game and executed brilliantly. The rematch I though we were going to get a much better fight so it seemed until Mike just snapped, However Holyfield did rock mike in the first round of that rematch people all to often under credit Evander and his power.
tyson was the more talented fighter but holyfield was more disciplined, skilled and consistent. advantage holyfield.
Exactly. Holyfield is clearly the greater fighter. Both are ATGs, but Holyfield actually beat some of the other great fighters in his era, including Tyson himself. Against top tier opposition, sometimes not even that, Tyson folded.
