Who is the greatest HW of the last 25 years?

Lewis for me, if you ignore the 25 year limit, Holmes would be second, Holyfield third, then Tyson. But if you count careers instead of accomplishments at heavy, I'd give the nod to Holyfield. It's actually amazing how low Tyson ranks on this list. At one point it looked like almost a certainty that he would rank at number one. Unfortunately, he's a classic case of unforefilled expectations.

 

i would give the nod to holyfield but i do wonder how much of what he was able to do was because he was juiced

 

What Tyson lacks in longevity he makes up for in dominance. I believe that Tyson's dominance when he reigned as champion outweigh's Lewis's longevity.

Nobody considered Lewis the guy until 1999 when he beat Holyfield.
So from 1999-2003 is the extent of Lewis's reign though I admit that he had some good wins prior to that.

Tyson's reign is from 1986-1990 though he picked up a few decent wins after that.

Holmes in 1983-onwards takes away most of his signature wins.
Holyfield was too inconsistant for me to give him the nod above Tyson and Lewis

 

Probably Lennox.Larry was fading by '83, and didn't fight Page and Thomas and probably did not want another piece of Witherspoon.

 

Its gonna be Valuev, he have the best record from all of them

 

If it was from 1978 then I would say Holmes.

 

2ironmt, AbbasKhan6428, ace_mdrgn, Akeel, aliboomaye, bzolor, ChampionsForever, fadeintobolivia, FROST, ibar78, ironchamp, Larson, LeadLeftHook, PATRICKBOXING, Scorpion, Sdt, sinan58, Sir Stalingrad

ffs.

 

Lennox....but ONLY because the title of the post says "the last 25 years"...placing the cutoff at about 1983...when Holmes was already 41-0 and had defended the HW title a number of times.

All time, I have Holmes ranked slightly higher...but of the past 25...its Lewis.

 

Please name one great PRIME fighter that Tyson defeated during this time of dominance???

waiting....


waiting....


waiting....


:huh

When your best wins are Old Larry Holmes, Blown up LHW Michael Spinks and Razor Ruddick...you aint the greatest ANYTHING bro...sorry. I agree his reign was the most dominant, but how would Lewis or Holmes or Holyfield have looked vs Mike's competition. People ALLLLLLLLLLLWAYS ignore that fact.

 

I agree but since it's not I say Lewis.

 

The answer is Tyson. Whether or not you want to argue his merits as the best, best and greatest are two different things. Greatest to me suggests spectacular, and someone who can really capture the world's interest. Tyson was clearly that, to the point where alot of the mainstream attention Holyfield and Lewis got worldwide didn't happen until after they beat Iron Mike. Whether you beat him or not, Tyson was still the measuring stick and the fighter people asked about the most. Even now, he's in the news moreso than the other 3 even though Holy was still fighting.

If he weren't there to play the villain, I really don't think the 90's era of heavyweights would be remembered as fondly as it is today.

Being the youngest HW champion in history, unifying the belts the hard way, and being as dominant as he was in his prime doesn't hurt, either.

 

By your criteria, Arturo Gatti was GREATER than Pernell Whitaker.

Greatest should DEFINATELY go on merits, accomplishments, resume, skills, h2h, etc. Not on hype and excitement!

 

nah, his post was great and on point. Tyson's accomplishments, skills, h2h ability is what gave him that aura which still lasts to a degree. tyson's skills (at his peak) aren't touched by any of the other hw's mentioned. what he accomplished winning the hw at 20, unifying, and utterly dominating almost all the contenders he fought is incredible. a lot of people must be watching the espn replays of tyson's early fights against mostly bums and think that's all he fought.

the analogy to gatti is misplaced. arturo got a reputation from wars with a b-level fighter (ward) and a couple of other warlike performances with some solid fighters. gatti's aura is nothing like tyson's.

 

No his post was not great and on point...it was that to you because you agree with it.

You mention Tyson's dominance, but you fail to mention WHO that dominance was against. As I have said, please name one GREAT fighter he defeated??? You cant because there were none. If there had been, his dominance would not have been so dominating....not in the slightest bit (if you switch each fighters resumes to Mike...and he was NOWHERE NEAR AS DOMINATING!!!).

You also say his skills were unmatched by the rest of the other fighters mentioned...which in all honesty is crap! His PHYSICAL ABILITY was unmatched by them (speed, reflexes, explosiveness, etc. I agree with...but skills???)...but all three were better "boxers" and held more in the manner of "skill" than Mike.

Then you account how short his reign truely was and you CANNOT put him above any of them.

I was a HUGE fan of Mike's when I was younger (who wasnt??), and I do have him in my top ten all time HWs...but he was in no way no how no shape or form "greater" then the other three mentioned in this post.

 

No shame in voting for Tyson. I'm a Brit btw, and rate Tyson's admittedly short dominance more impressive than Lewis's longevity. Greatest is a subjective thing anyway. For me it's close between Lewis/Tyson (Holmes discounted as previous posters have suggested)., but remembering the sheer impact of Tyson in his pomp - I say he's the greatest of the last 25 years.