HOLYFIELD LOSES GRIP ON REALITY WITH EACH DAY!

[crusader]

Maybe it's because Holyfield should have the title Haye is fighting for.

No he shouldn't. He lost and it was a fair decision. The man would be 47 by fight time and hasn't scored a meaningful win since squeaking by Rahman with a little assistance from his head in 2002. In the last five years he has been thoroughly outclassed and beaten by James Toney, Larry Donald, and in his second to last fight Sultan Ibragimov. On the other hand he hasn't scored a win over a single top ten fighter.

Holyfield has no chance at beating any decent HW who actually throws punches and he stands no chance against Haye. Is this what David Haye is all about? Fighting old men who slur their speech and have no chance at winning? Holyfield should have retired a long time ago, either that or get back to exhibitions with African light heavyweights. Don't get delusional because he fought a close fight (and terribly boring one in which he threw 15 punches a round) with Valuev, he is not a top HW. You seem to be forgetting about all his other recent performances...

How would beating Holyfield boost Haye's reputation? I don't mean his wallet, but how would it a win over old man Evander gain him respect from the boxing community?

[overhand_right]

I can't comment as I didn't see the fight, but most reports I've read have said that Holyfield made a fight of it but didn't deserve the W in his record - it clearly wasn't the robbery you're proclaiming it to be.

I have the fight, Holyfield easily walks it, 118-110 on my scorecard! A very one-sided, easy to score fight, if you're not a sleazy WBA judge.

[alectrifyingalex]

Now I was a massive Holyfield fan and at his peak one of the all-time greats but he's lost the plot completely.

He goes on about David Haye not deserving a title shot and how when he moved up from cruiser he fought six times before he became no1 contender to fight the Tyson v Douglas winner.

Fair point, but he then goes on about Haye giving him a title shot if he beats Valuev and how he wouldn't fight Haye if HE was champion...

But what has HE done to deserve a fight with Haye. In fact, what has he really done in the last few years to deserve any of the title shots he's had. He's lost all touch with reality (and probably isn't as sharp as he should be considering the punishment he's taken over the years anyhow).

Good grief why can't he just let go and get on with his life. Assume he needs the money... which is even more tragic after all of the hard work he's put in and fantastic fights he's given us over the years.

Deserving to beat Valuev? which is more credentials then Haye has in challenging for the title.

And what he means by that is, if Holyfeild was again in his prime like Haye is, he wouldn't fight an over the hill fighter for his defense (in this case Holyfeild) he thinks Haye is probably taking the easy way out, be the best fight the best type thing maybe?

[yiddo14]

Holy fighting for any title thsedays is just wrong imo, mainly because he isn't nowhere near as good as he once was and him still fighting is damaging the sport and himself.

All the old fella is trying to do is land a payday so take his comments with a pinch of salt and go and re-watch the Bowe trilogy

Prime for prime, he would splatter Haye and Valuev on the same night, yet here he is begging to fight one of them...I just find it a bit sad to be honest.

Retire Evander and write a book etc. He could make enough money doing other things.
Isn't he loved in the States?

[Deserter]

I can't comment as I didn't see the fight, but most reports I've read have said that Holyfield made a fight of it but didn't deserve the W in his record - it clearly wasn't the robbery you're proclaiming it to be.

I have the fight, Holyfield easily walks it, 118-110 on my scorecard! A very one-sided, easy to score fight, if you're not a sleazy WBA judge.

But unless there are a series of sleazy WBA judges posting on this forum, that clearly isn't the case fella.

[mickey1975]

Holy fighting for any title thsedays is just wrong imo, mainly because he isn't nowhere near as good as he once was and him still fighting is damaging the sport and himself.

All the old fella is trying to do is land a payday so take his comments with a pinch of salt and go and re-watch the Bowe trilogy

Prime for prime, he would splatter Haye and Valuev on the same night, yet here he is begging to fight one of them...I just find it a bit sad to be honest.

Retire Evander and write a book etc. He could make enough money doing other things.
Isn't he loved in the States?

He wrote one.it was heavily publicised over here and became a best seller,despite him refusing to sign it on a "book signing" tour

[Wales]

How would beating Holyfield boost Haye's reputation? I don't mean his wallet, but how would it a win over old man Evander gain him respect from the boxing community?

Because Holyfield is known in the US, and Haye isnt? hence his reputation would be boosted should he win because all the yanks will stand up and take note.

Is Holyfield any more "shot" than Roy JOnes Jr? yet Calzgahe fought him?

Haye is well over rated as a HW fighter.

[Deserter]

Haye is well over rated as a HW fighter.

It's impossible to say at this juncture as on both sides of the fence it's speculation. He may end up being regarded as over-rated, but if he went on to beat Valuev and both Kilts (unlikely, imo), there's a strong argument for saying he was historically under-rated.

[Wales]

It's impossible to say at this juncture .

No it isnt, at this moment in time he in my opinion he is being overrated. Now is the correct juncture when you talk about rating someone, you dont rate someone on the future.

[Deserter]

It's impossible to say at this juncture .

No it isnt, at this moment in time he in my opinion he is being overrated. Now is the correct juncture when you talk about rating someone, you dont rate someone on the future.

Absolute nonsense. You rate boxers on achievement, not on speculation. None of us know categorically at this stage whether he can cut it at heavy or not. Anyone who claims otherwise is just plain wrong.

[Wales]

nonsense? What? I said I believe Haye is overrated at HW, you rate a boxer on what they have done up to now. You couldnt rate Khan as a world champion before he turned pro. If anyone did you'd say "you're over rating khan" . If I started saying I rate Khan as p4p the best fighter on the planet, I'd be jumped on and people would say "you're over rating him" nobody would say "maybe you're right"

I said Haye is over rated at HW, until he achieves something to warrant his current status he will remain (in my eyes) over rated at the weight.

[Deserter]

nonsense? What? I said I believe Haye is overrated at HW, you rate a boxer on what they have done up to now. You couldnt rate Khan as a world champion before he turned pro. If anyone did you'd say "you're over rating khan" . If I started saying I rate Khan as p4p the best fighter on the planet, I'd be jumped on and people would say "you're over rating him" nobody would say "maybe you're right"

I said Haye is over rated at HW, until he achieves something to warrant his current status he will remain (in my eyes) over rated at the weight.

You're missing my point and from what I can see you're actually agreeing with me now in terms of referencing achievement. I'm saying at this point Haye is an unknown quantity at heavy precisely because the fights with Valuev etc haven't happened yet - once they have we're all in a position to judge better.
I don't understand the over-rated comment purely because I haven't seen anyone on here actually rate him as the saviour of the division - a minority think he's in with a chance of toppling the Klits, but even they seem quite happy to acknowledge that it could easily play out the oher way given the question marks over his chin etc.
From my own viewpoint, I think he can beat Valuev, but that has a lot more to do with how poor I think Valuev is than how highly I rate Haye - I think both Klits would stop him.

[Wales]

Im not missing your point at all. I understand perfectly how to rate fighters, both past and present.

I said Hayes being over rated .... you said its impossible at this juncture.

No it isnt, you can rate a fighter at the present point in time. His overall rating will come at the end of his career, but you strill rate fighters as you go along.

My comment (that you jumped on) was Haye is being over rated. Thats "the point" nothing to do with how you rate the potential of fighters, which is what you've now started going on about. You disagreed with Haye being overated because of what he might achieve. Not what he has achieved at the weight.

Yes, people are saying he can topple the klits, you have to be pretty effing good to do that - hence the over rating. I think everyone looks at what Haye can do (cruiserweight KO power, speed), but nobody wonders what the other big pudendum is going to be doing in there with him - aint going to be standing there waiting to be chinned, thats for sure.

[stujones]

Can I ask if this OP was based on the stuff mentioned on the BBC website. If so, I read it completely differently to the OP.

Holyfield is NOT comparing who is more deserving David Haye or Evander NOW. He was obviously asked questions based on Holyfield being a former cruiserweight champ moving up to heavyweight... and he simply (and correctly) points out how that comparison is flawed, cause Holyfield beat a series of contenders to become #1 contender to Tyson... Haye hasn't.

Holy is simply saying he was more worthy in 1989 than Haye is in 2009... and its very correct!

Everything he says on the BBC article makes perfect sense.

[Deserter]

Im not missing your point at all. I understand perfectly how to rate fighters, both past and present.

I said Hayes being over rated .... you said its impossible at this juncture.

No it isnt, you can rate a fighter at the present point in time. His overall rating will come at the end of his career, but you strill rate fighters as you go along.

My comment (that you jumped on) was Haye is being over rated. Thats "the point" nothing to do with how you rate the potential of fighters, which is what you've now started going on about. You disagreed with Haye being overated because of what he might achieve. Not what he has achieved at the weight.

Yes, people are saying he can topple the klits, you have to be pretty effing good to do that - hence the over rating. I think everyone looks at what Haye can do (cruiserweight KO power, speed), but nobody wonders what the other big pudendum is going to be doing in there with him - aint going to be standing there waiting to be chinned, thats for sure.

And I continue to maintain it's impossible to give an accurate assessment of Haye at heavy at this juncture purely because he remains such an unknown quantity. How could you, for example, assess Paul Williams at Middle - you can't. By contrast, you can rate Kelly Pavilk at Middle very easily because he's a known quantity at that weight.
At no point have I disagreed with Haye being over-rated, I've stated all along that it's all speculation and until we've established what he brings to the table in the heavy division it's virtually impossible to gauge whether individuals are over-rating or under-rating him.

[Wales]

So would it be fair to say I couldnt rate Amir Khan at middleweight? I couldnt fairly say "he'd be shit at middleweight" because I havent seen him fight there? Or cant rate him at welterweight after only one fight?

my issue is 2 fights at HW, against two poor opponents when we talk about world level, been knocked down, and now he's ready to dethrone the klitchkos. Being over rated at the moment.

Well, like you yesterday, Im going down the pub. Half day today. Auf Wiendersehen pet.

[Deserter]

So would it be fair to say I couldnt rate Amir Khan at middleweight? I couldnt fairly say "he'd be poop at middleweight" because I havent seen him fight there? Or cant rate him at welterweight after only one fight?

my issue is 2 fights at HW, against two poor opponents when we talk about world level, been knocked down, and now he's ready to dethrone the klitchkos. Being over rated at the moment.

Well, like you yesterday, Im going down the pub. Half day today. Auf Wiendersehen pet.

I don't think you can rate Khan at Middle, so we're clearly getting to the root of the problem in that we just disagree on that, nothing more, nothing less. Enjoy the boozer

[overhand_right]

Anyone who can watch Holyfield-Valuev and score it in favour of Valuev probably just doesn't want to score it in favour of the old man, or might just not know what they're looking at.

Thankfully the commentators, the crowd and most of the press all saw Holyfield win the fight, despite a few British Boxrec posters who seemingly are always argumentative & just like to disagree with the popular perception of certain fights & fighters.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Im not missing your point at all. I understand perfectly how to rate fighters, both past and present.

I said Hayes being over rated .... you said its impossible at this juncture.

No it isnt, you can rate a fighter at the present point in time. His overall rating will come at the end of his career, but you strill rate fighters as you go along.

My comment (that you jumped on) was Haye is being over rated. Thats "the point" nothing to do with how you rate the potential of fighters, which is what you've now started going on about. You disagreed with Haye being overated because of what he might achieve. Not what he has achieved at the weight.

Yes, people are saying he can topple the klits, you have to be pretty effing good to do that - hence the over rating. I think everyone looks at what Haye can do (cruiserweight KO power, speed), but nobody wonders what the other big pudendum is going to be doing in there with him - aint going to be standing there waiting to be chinned, thats for sure.

Its hard to rate someone at a weight if they've only had one fight.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Anyone who can watch Holyfield-Valuev and score it in favour of Valuev probably just doesn't want to score it in favour of the old man, or might just not know what they're looking at.

- Ah, hah, hah, hah, he thinks it was a fight!

Don King told the old fool it was the finals of Dancing with the Stars is what it was.............BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!!!

[overhand_right]

Please leave your lame yank trolling posts where they belong on Current Scene.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Maybe it's because Holyfield should have the title Haye is fighting for.

-Ah, hah, hah, hah, Don King is waiting for Ruiz to turn 46 so he can share in the booty of having the two oldest title contenders ever fight for the 1/16th share for the WBA Interim Geriatric Belt promoted by the oldest promoter in heavyweight title history.

[opticald]

I can't comment as I didn't see the fight, but most reports I've read have said that Holyfield made a fight of it but didn't deserve the W in his record - it clearly wasn't the robbery you're proclaiming it to be.

I have the fight, Holyfield easily walks it, 118-110 on my scorecard! A very one-sided, easy to score fight, if you're not a sleazy WBA judge.

But unless there are a series of sleazy WBA judges posting on this forum, that clearly isn't the case fella.

Why do you keep commenting and arguing about a fight you admittedly HAVEN'T SEEN??

Do you not see the idiocy there??

[crusader]

How would beating Holyfield boost Haye's reputation? I don't mean his wallet, but how would it a win over old man Evander gain him respect from the boxing community?

Because Holyfield is known in the US, and Haye isnt? hence his reputation would be boosted should he win because all the yanks will stand up and take note.

Is Holyfield any more "shot" than Roy JOnes Jr? yet Calzgahe fought him?

Haye is well over rated as a HW fighter.

The problem with that is while Holyfield is known in the states, he is far from respected as a boxer at this time in his career and the US fight media have been calling for his retierment for a while. Beating Holyfield would do just as much for Haye as it did for Larry Donald when he outclassed the old man. The only thing the Americans will stand up and take note at is another big talker who doesn't back up his words and instead picks on the runts of the HW litter.

[Deserter]

Why do you keep commenting and arguing about a fight you admittedly HAVEN'T SEEN??

Do you not see the idiocy there??

The only idiocy is yours - I'm not arguing about that fight. I'm pointing out there are differing opinions as to who 'really' won it, which unfortunately for you is a statement of fact. Please make an effort to grasp that - at least with Wales I get a decent debate rather than your moronic nonsense.