was Holyfield really IN his prime in 1991?

:shock:

 

Sub-prime (near-prime, or non-prime) got us into this mess.

 

Lennox is certainly a good argument, but only because of the alphabet problem. He won his first title in 93, though it was nothing more than a paper title and he didnt even win it in the ring, but was simply handed it. True to my first paragraph though, he lost focus and was KOd by McCall before long, although he was not really the recognised champion, so the focus argument does not apply yet.

Even when he won the rematch with Oliver McCall, there was some type of weird situation where Tyson was the Champion before this but relinquished the title, so again it was a nothing world title, and he did not have cause to lose focus. It was not until 1988 when Lewis became a real champion when he beat the lineal champion Shannon Briggs. Though at this time, most did not consider him the champion anyway, and a Holyfield series was reached to determine the real undisputed champion. Holyfield was considered the best fighter in the world, due to his victory over Mike Tyson. In reality, The Lewis Holyfield fights were the fights that Made Lewis the best fighter in the world and this is where he became the world Champion. So, i guess that about here or maybe one or two fights later is where he was at his peak and he started to sit on his title and erode. True to history (and my first paragraph) it wasnt long before Lewis was KOd by Rahman and he had let himself slip.

Lewis did have 3 more good wins in Rahman, Tyson and Klitchsko, but in reality, as good as 2 of those wins were, it wasnt really peak Lewis. Certainly the Lewis of the Holyfield fights, at worst was the better fighter and in all probability, a much earlier version of Lewis could have easily been.

 

Regardless of the height of his physical capabilities, Holyfield did not fully mature as a fighter until he lost to Riddick Bowe. That was the first time Holyfield's will did not carry him to victory. Strategy became more important to Holyfield.

 

I thought the Holyfield that beat Bowe in the second fight was just about the best version of Holyfield at heavyweight. Against Foreman, Holyfield looked like dynamite, but it's a lot easier for a speedy fighter like Holyfield to look spectacular against a slow moving and plodding type of fighter like Foreman was. Against Bowe, he fought a smart, tactiful fight against a big, strong, and fairly fast big heavyweight, and Holyfield mixed in controlled aggression and bursts of rapid fire punching beautifully.

 

I think fighters have physical prime and mental prime, and often sheer force of will helps them to still compete in the years when physically they're waning. Certainly the best fighters have been able to do that, to alter and adapt as they get older yet still keep on winning. It's when those physical and mental primes overlap that you get your peak.

The Holyfield of the Bowe II fight is indeed my favourite 'version' of Holyfield, as he still has the ability of his youth (and at least in strength terms was arguably better) plus the extra focus, experience and a good game plan.

However, that version of Holyfield also had the boreathon earlier in the year against Stewart. Stewart was in defensive mode almost exclusively, but it still goes to show that even the best version of a fighter, any fighter, can still get frustrated and put on a lacklustre (if still dominant) showing.

 

His physical prime was Douglas and Foreman ... few mention how exceptional he looked in the Douglas bout, prefering to say Douglas quit but no one went through Douglas like that before and Douglas was coming off his career defining win and was still in his own prime.

 

Holyfield would have most likely beaten him anyway, but Douglas was in horrible shape both mentally and physically for that fight. He shouldnt have even showed up that night. He definitely could have gotten up from the knockdown too.

 

I agree. Holyfield look terrific and did a job on him.

Just like Tyson looked terrific against Holmes, Tubbs and Spinks, and we shouldn't dwell on their condition, we all know Tyson was sensational.
Holyfield never gets the credit for the Douglas fight.

 

i think he peaked against foreman.......

 

If Bowe did hit his peak in the year of 1993 does that mean by 1996 he was past his prime because general concensus say that he was.

 

im amazed you bothered quoting all that

 

Me too. If I'm bored enough to do that, there must be something wrong. Can't wait for my new job :-(

 

I just rewatched Moorer1/Bowe3 and Holy really looks shot to pieces, then against Tyson/Moorer and even Lennox he looks transformed, physically and in many ways. HE really managed to re-invigor himself

 

This content is protected