Why is Mike Tyson ranked above Holyfield?

Fighters can only fight the competition in their respective era's, not opponents of the past or future, only the present.

 

Wlad, even tho he's great, didn't have a series with 15 Top 10s back to back. Neither did Louis and he's argubly the greatest.

You're changing your tune right now, so according to your criteria, Ali's and Lennox's series were better than Tyson's.

 

bull****, sorry... I'm not changing anything. For me, everything matters: the value of the rivals, the eye test, the quality of the victory, the style. Quantity too, of course. Because a lucky punch can happen, but when someone knocks out rivals such as Tubbs, Spinks, Biggs, Berbick, Stewart, Holmes, it seems easy, you can't ignore it and interfere - but McBride... well, in a moment Tyson may lose to a YouTuber, which does it matter for his sports resume? for the image ok, some people confuse these concepts. Teddy Atlas and Bert Sugar didn't like Tyson and they confused people

 

The question is, who wins if they fight in '90, like they were supposed to? Looking at Douglas-Tyson, I'd say Holyfield wins then too.

 

yes, I think Larry Holmes would also beat Tyson from Tokyo and Douglas from Las Vegas.

 

In 1991 I'd favour Tyson Holyfield was considerably more muscular and stronger due to PEDs in 1996, he'd also become a much smarter fighter and wasn't so gung ho looking for a slugfest in every fight.

Tyson in 1991 could still go 12 rounds in a hard fight as evident by the Ruddock fight, and whilst he wasn't quite the same fighter he was in the 80s. I still believe Tyson was in good form with stoppages over Stewart, Tillman, and surviving two stern tests vs hard punching Ruddock.

Holyfield during this time was having toe to toe slugfests vs the likes of Cooper, Dokes, Stewart, in which in got considerably hurt in all 3 fights in which he slugged it out too much.

I don't see that version of Holyfield beating a still good version of Tyson in 1991.

 

I see even lists where Tyson is above Lewis but I dont consider them.

 

Holyfield's first title reign was mediocre (Foreman, Cooper, Holmes). His second reign didn't exist bc he immediately lost to Moorer. His third reign was also mediocre ("bite fight," Moorer, and Vaughn Bean). Bowe was better than him in the early nineties and Lewis was better in the late 90s if not altogether. The Bowe win was good but close in his second of three tries, and the first Tyson win was good but overhyped at the time. 1--1-1 against Ruiz and a dirty win against Rahman as a n old guy....Also PEDs. The Dokes win was decent.

Mike totally cleaned up against good opposition and unified three belts and lineal in separate fights. The Ruddock fights should also be rated highly. Unifying two belts and beating Golota a decade or more after beating Berbick is something too.

 

Lewis is too high in most places, in my opinion he's not even close to Tyson. Holyfield is

 

Really? on what basis? His biggest victory is the 37-year-old Holy, right after the fight with Bean and right before Ruiz, where it was obvious that he was clearly worse than in the fights with Bowe, Moorer, Tyson. The fights with Lewis were also average. He fought evenly with Mercer and did not give him a rematch. He was knocked out by C-class boxers like Rahman and Razor, what other champion lost like that? Who did Lewis win convincingly against ATG? He was on the verge of losing to someone like Briggs who should have lost to 50 year old Foreman. He gave up one belt to Ruiz, the other to Byrd. He escaped before the rematch with Klitschko. What achievements does he have to put him in the top 10 HW???

 

I've always said: Tyson destroys guys that are labeled as bums but Holyfield struggles against the same quality and he's deemed a warrior.

 

I'm very confident that Tyson would beat the crap out of Bowe and delegate him to a Tuckeresque career.

 

He isn't as often as he is.

 

Well, this is puzzling. I heard many times that Tyson beat LHW (Spinks), and still LHW and LHW, but I don't know that anyone had a problem with Holmes losing the title and long-term dominance from LHW (exactly the same fight). I have never once heard anyone have a problem with Holyfield losing the title to LHW (Moorer), on the contrary - I heard people say that the rematch with LHW was the best or one of the best performances of Holyfield's career and is considered a great success.