My personal opinion is that Lewis was the better heavyweight, but Holyfield was a modern great P4P-wise, and should be ranked highly for his accomplishments and great fights above his best weight. Also, I credit him a lot for the Valuev fight as well in the same way as I score the Chavez fight for Whitaker.
Lewis has a superior HW resume Holyfield has a superior career resume This is very clear and I can't see how it is even debatable..
Agree with this. Although Holyfield's single best HW win is on a par or better than Lewis', his overall record at Heavyweight isn't quite so and he wasn't as convincing a champ as Lewis.
IF you try to match WINS (only) that are similar in quality, it is quite close Holyfieldx2>Tysonx2 Vitalix1<Bowex1 Golota>Douglas Tua>Moorer Rudduck>Holmes Mercer=Mercer Prime Mason>Old Thomas Old Tyson>Old Foreman Akiwande>Ruiz Rahman=Rahman Bruno>Dokes Morrison>Alex Stewart Mike Grant>Bean Briggs>Bert Cooper Botha>Oquendo Mavrovic>Rodriguez McCall>Savaresse Now I'm sure you can argue either way for many of those but its quite close with allot of them. As we go further in depth of the resume LEwis's wins have more quality to them, but in fairness that isnt including Holy's cruser fights, but then again Holy has fought for an extra 10years To make it fair when they were both 37 Lennox had 2 losses, Holyfield 4 (but should be 5)
A lot of those are pretty tough to determine which is better...... I'd generally agree, barring those highlighted - but it's all subjective of course. I'm not sure Gary Mason was better than Pinklon Thomas - Mason fought a lot of stiffs to pad his KO ratio.
Beyond biased. For someone who questions someone's biased-ness or lack of objectivity this is really quite astounding. Not even worth correcting half of the slant of this post.
As I said you can argue, Thomas was certainly better prime for prime, although looked shot against Holyfield with a lack of effort, Mason was prime and gave a good account of himself, perhaps this was an excellent performance by Holyfield. I dont think much to Foreman in his comeback to be honest, Holmes is a far better win for Holyfield. I also truly think Akiwande is a better boxer than Ruiz, but Ruiz obviously achieved more, getting more opportunities and over achieving along the way
Where's the bias, I tried to remain impartial, all the HW wins of each fighter are there matched up comparatively, and as I mentioned the wins comparison are close and subjective. I'm a fan of Lennox but also of Holyfield, who'd beat Marciano btw :yep If you prefer to bother to make your own analysis feel free
Certainly the Holmes win was better for Evander than that over George. Akinwande is a tough guy to rate, admittedly. I wouldn't have favoured him over a guy like Frank Bruno..... it was easier to base himself in America away from the clamour of all-British showdowns and beat lesser fighters with deceiving records.
Henry seemed to have some decent skills but clearly wasnt strong enough to withhold a powerhouse like Lewis, after that debacle he was shunned by promoters and tv networks alike. That fight aside he was a pretty decent prospect, fast hands, 86inch reach, 6'7, good jab and right I'm not sure he'd keep Bruno off him either but for the sort of money you got fighting Bruno it probably would have happened if he was offered it, so imo he wouldnt have been. Aside from those 2 and Hide I'm not sure the British domestic scene was that hot around '95 onwards, Oyebola (RIP), Welch and Francis were the Brit champs, a weak era and he fought Welch, who was considered the worst Brit Champ ever if I remember rightly. Akiwande has a decent record against fringe contenders types Schulz x2, Tucker, Jeremy Williams, Johnny Nelson, Orlin Norris, Hoffman, so no greats but he showed promise, was working his way way back into contention after the Lewis fight on a nice winning run until McCall smashed him after Henry was about 10rounds up, but thats boxing In an era like today though, Klitschkos/Haye aside he would have a shot against anyone imo
Overall body of work suggests the man that became king of two divisions I believe Holy was an overachiever gifted at climbing mountains whereas Lewis was a better caretaker of the heavyweight championship - able to defend it more consistently. When Lewis and Holy fought Evander was definitely on the decline...and in the rematch he fought well. From a style perspective, and this is purely subjective, I believe Lewis would rate higher on a head to head list in fantasy scenario's than would Holy...who himself wouldn't rate "low". Much has to do with style as much as pedigree. Both were great fighters.
This is actually a good way to do it. The title of the thread was " who had the better resume ", and not " who was the better heavyweight. " Holyfield dominated an entire division and unified all its belts before even ascending to heavyweight. Upon his stepping up in weight, he became the division's only 4 time belt holder.. Like yourself, I rate Lewis as the better heavyweight, but I think Holy is a better pound for pound choice.
Power puncher is a bandwagon jumper, but hes a good guy. Im the greatest poster in the world to him in a Roy Jones thread!
Alright. Let's see where to begin. Let's start with the first one. Tyson x2 > Holyfield X2. Holyfield was clearly more forgone from his prime, at least physically. Sure, he had just beaten Tyson twice and was a unified champ. But Lennox had many physical advantages, and was a much fresher fighter. He also, didn't put much of a performance in either fight. For me, the Tyson wins are clearly better. I rank Tyson above Holyfield, and by 1996 I don't feel Tyson was as foregone as many project. The Tyson wins with Tyson being 30 compared to an aging Holyfield just doesn't equate for me. I think it's obvious. Respectively, Golota is a fair was far more consistent within his performances. But he wasn't a winner. In hindsight, the Douglas win gets tainted because Douglas doesn't come out with a care so in the context it's not a serious win for Holyfield, but as far as legacy goes Holyfield did beat the man who just trashed arguably the most feared HW. Tua was 20 pounds heavier than in the Ike fight. Moorer is a much more balanced, and complete fighter with a better resume/performance in his respective career to boot. The Moorer win is better (Regardless of Tua blasting him out). Old Tyson is in no way better win than Old Foreman. Sorry, Foreman gave himself a terrific and surprising account of himself. Old Tyson didn't train, wasn't mentally prepared, and only won 1 round. Holyfield at a later age with a recent KO loss to Bowe come on the scene to knock out Tyson, then rematch him in win by DQ in the 3rd round. Lewis KOed a much older, much worse Tyson in only 3 rounds less. Foreman hit Holyfield with "The hardest punch he had ever been hit with." Foreman won some rounds, and went the distance making it a tough fight. I'll take that Foreman to blitz Tyson out to ****ing hell with zero hesitation. I'll also give that Foreman more chance to trouble Lewis, AND I'll say even that Foreman beats a 96 Tyson. Clearly you're off base here. What's interesting for the rest of them is the way you match up the fighters to compare. For me, Stewart is better than say perhaps Briggs (Although that is debatable). But it really doesn't matter much, because those wins in comparison are so marginal in historical importance and in terms of being either greater or worse. Lastly, you forgot to mention Holyfield's resume at cruiser-weight. We're talking P4P here. Holyfield's resume is superior. Arguing Lewis is a better HW is another thing, one that is clearly acceptable of a view.
Golota was in no way a bigger win than Douglas. Douglas had just whupped "the baddest man on earth" and was the unified HW champion. All Golota had done was give Bowe hell in two LOSING efforts. Saying an old Tyson was a better win than Foreman is questionable as well, given that Foreman was still good enough to become the champ after that and was arguably a better and more accomplished fighter than Tyson to begin with. Also, I don't get why you chose to make some of the comparisons that you have. Why not compare Ruddock or Grant to Bowe for example, or Vitali or Tua to Tyson?