Who was more exciting: Tyson or Holyfield

Evening JT. You talk about the casual fan; to this day in England when someone looks a bit battered, say a footballer cops a ball smack in the face, commentators invariably say 'He looks like he's been 12 rounds with Mike Tyson'. We forget now, and are almost wise after the event, but in an era full of great fighters, Tyson was the face of boxing to such an extent that nearly 30 years on, to the casual fan, he still is.

 

Are you an idiot?:shock:

 

Now this is what i'm talking about!!!!

Exactly.

 

Of course Tyson had wider popular appeal and there was a mystique surrounding him.

That's not how I'd measure how exciting a fighter is/was though.

Besides, most of those casual fans were often disappointed and underwhelmed when Tyson blew an opponent out in the 1st round, or else intimidated/steamrolled them in 2 or 3.

 

Do you like to see one sided knockouts that end quickly? Tyson.

Or

Do you like to see full scale wars where both fighters take massive amounts of punishment? Holyfield.

 

Tyson had the more exciting style with his combination of speed, power and aggression.

But in terms of who had the more entertaining fights, that's Holyfield hands down. The fights with Bowe, Qawi were more exciting than any Tyson fight for me.

 

Holyfield beat Tyson twice. So he had more power, speed, and CONTROLLED aggression. Just saying.

 

You've added one and one together and gotten 3.

Just because Holyfield beat Tyson doesn't mean he was faster or hit harder because it's clear Tyson was better in these departments.

Holyfield was clearly stronger, smarter and better prepared to deal with opponent than Tyson was though.

Agree about controlled aggression at least in regards to their fight. But we are talking about excitement not effectiveness, uncontrolled aggression can be damn exciting.

 

Did Tyson fight Foreman? No, but Holyfield did, for 12 exciting rounds. Did Tyson fight Bowe? No, but Holyfield did for 3 exciting brain damaging fights. Tyson lost to buster Douglas, holy whooped Douglas within 3. Tyson got his ass whooped by Lewis, Holy fought Lewis twice. Oh and the only reason tyson had more "power" was because he was Holyfields only opponent that was smaller than him. Holy always fought bigger stronger opponents, yet he brawled with them win or lose.

Not to discredit Tyson though. He's funnier, faster (youngest heavyweight champion) and a great character outside the ring...not sure about Holyfield though because he's ALWAYS fighting and he has his own uncontrollable aggression: THE HOLY HEADBUTT (ask Rahman).

Amen.

 

on number of total fans excited it would obviously be Tyson, for the more passionate and experienced fan it would be close and possibly Holy.

 

Tyson's fast conclusive knock outs as he cut a swathe thru the division is what led people to and highlighted his appeal and mystique. If he was beating everyone by decision and couldn't bust a g**** he would have had very little public appeal and mystique as very few would have been overly interested, particularly the casual fan.

The only real time i saw people disappointed was when they perceived Tyson's opponent to be not giving their best effort.

Hard to be disappointed when someone is dominating in such great fashion via great power and aggression, not to mention subtle skills.

 

Prime for prime Tyson was the more exciting and dynamic of the two.

However, because of his medicocre defense, many of Holfyield's fights at both Cruiserweight and Heavyweight prime were very exciting:

Qawi I
Cooper
Bowe I and III

 

I just read this after my post.

Looks like we are on the same page :good

 

Sometimes he posts some good stuff

But, whenever a thread related to Tyson or Sugar Ray Leonard comes around...

Yes, he becomes an idiot.

 

Agreed, as well as the fact Holy could not bomb them out of there as fast and as often as Tyson on the whole.