Out of the 90's which heavyweight came in on top?

[iceman21287]

The records of Lewis and Holyfield from 1990 to 1999:

Lewis: 29-1-1, 22 KO's

Notable wins:

TKO 2 Razor Ruddock
UD 12 Tony Tucker
TKO 7 Frank Bruno
TKO 6 Tommy Morrison
MD 10 Ray Mercer (Controversial decision)
TKO 5 Oliver McCall
KO 1 Andrew Golota
TKO 5 Shannon Briggs
UD 12 Evander Holyfield (should have been UD 12 twice)

Notable Losses:

TKO 2 Oliver McCall

Holyfield: 13-4-1, 5 KO's

Notable Wins:

KO 3 Buster Douglas
UD 12 George Foreman
UD 12 Larry Holmes
MD 12 Riddick Bowe
UD 10 Ray Mercer
TKO 11 Mike Tyson
DQ 3 Mike Tyson
TKO 8 Michael Moorer

Notable Losses:

UD 12 Riddick Bowe
MD 12 Michael Moorer
TKO 8 Riddick Bowe
UD 12 Lennox Lewis

In terms of wins and losses, Lewis clearly was the better heavyweight between 1990 and 1999. However, and argument could be made that Holyfield fought overall better competition than Lewis during this time period.

If I have to choose, I would go with Lennox. 29-1-1 against top heavyweight competition with his only loss coming from a one punch KO that he later avenged.

[wlvrne]

Right. Many cite that Holyfield often had excuses for losses but come on . . that fight is a CLEAR example of a fighter not being healthy. Much more bizarre then Klitschko-Brewster. Holyfield just fell apart . . .and he still gave a helluva performance and almost knocked Bowe out. I don't regard as Bowe having shown he was the better man by their 3 fights. If anything the rubber match showed to me that if healthy Evander would've knocked Riddick out.

Yeah, because in that 3rd fight, Holyfield was the first person to knock Bowe on his can. But then Bowe came back and put the hurt on Evander.
Too bad these 3 didn't make like Ali,Frazier,and Foreman in the 70's. I really did want to see Bowe fight Lewis, regardless of the outcome. And Holyfield should have fought Lewis then too. If all 3 had been mixing up together instead of 3 Bowe/Holyfield matches, we would have had a totally different heavyweight scenario. I think the 3 Bowe/Holyfield fights took too much out of each of them.

[meade95]

The records of Lewis and Holyfield from 1990 to 1999:

Lewis: 29-1-1, 22 KO's

Notable wins:

TKO 2 Razor Ruddock
UD 12 Tony Tucker
TKO 7 Frank Bruno
TKO 6 Tommy Morrison
MD 10 Ray Mercer (Controversial decision)
TKO 5 Oliver McCall
KO 1 Andrew Golota
TKO 5 Shannon Briggs
UD 12 Evander Holyfield (should have been UD 12 twice)

Notable Losses:

TKO 2 Oliver McCall

Holyfield: 13-4-1, 5 KO's

Notable Wins:

KO 3 Buster Douglas
UD 12 George Foreman
UD 12 Larry Holmes
MD 12 Riddick Bowe
UD 10 Ray Mercer
TKO 11 Mike Tyson
DQ 3 Mike Tyson
TKO 8 Michael Moorer

Notable Losses:

UD 12 Riddick Bowe
MD 12 Michael Moorer
TKO 8 Riddick Bowe
UD 12 Lennox Lewis

In terms of wins and losses, Lewis clearly was the better heavyweight between 1990 and 1999. However, and argument could be made that Holyfield fought overall better competition than Lewis during this time period.

If I have to choose, I would go with Lennox. 29-1-1 against top heavyweight competition with his only loss coming from a one punch KO that he later avenged.

Holyfield's competition is much better then Lennox's - And again, if not for a scoring error (which the judge admitted) Holyfield doesn't have a loss to Moorer....nor did Holyfield lose to Lennox in their second fight (he clearly won that fight...it was a make-up for their first fight.) - Additionally Holyfield was much past his prime by 98,99....while Lennox was in his -

I think it comes down to whom do most people (in the boxing profession and out) think would win if both men were in their primes on their best nights). I think without a doubt the vast majority would pick Holyfield.

Again an old Holyfield took Lennox 12 rounds both times (and deserved the decision the second time).

[iceman21287]

The records of Lewis and Holyfield from 1990 to 1999:

Lewis: 29-1-1, 22 KO's

Notable wins:

TKO 2 Razor Ruddock
UD 12 Tony Tucker
TKO 7 Frank Bruno
TKO 6 Tommy Morrison
MD 10 Ray Mercer (Controversial decision)
TKO 5 Oliver McCall
KO 1 Andrew Golota
TKO 5 Shannon Briggs
UD 12 Evander Holyfield (should have been UD 12 twice)

Notable Losses:

TKO 2 Oliver McCall

Holyfield: 13-4-1, 5 KO's

Notable Wins:

KO 3 Buster Douglas
UD 12 George Foreman
UD 12 Larry Holmes
MD 12 Riddick Bowe
UD 10 Ray Mercer
TKO 11 Mike Tyson
DQ 3 Mike Tyson
TKO 8 Michael Moorer

Notable Losses:

UD 12 Riddick Bowe
MD 12 Michael Moorer
TKO 8 Riddick Bowe
UD 12 Lennox Lewis

In terms of wins and losses, Lewis clearly was the better heavyweight between 1990 and 1999. However, and argument could be made that Holyfield fought overall better competition than Lewis during this time period.

If I have to choose, I would go with Lennox. 29-1-1 against top heavyweight competition with his only loss coming from a one punch KO that he later avenged.

Holyfield's competition is much better then Lennox's - And again, if not for a scoring error (which the judge admitted) Holyfield doesn't have a loss to Moorer....nor did Holyfield lose to Lennox in their second fight (he clearly won that fight...it was a make-up for their first fight.) - Additionally Holyfield was much past his prime by 98,99....while Lennox was in his -

I think it comes down to whom do most people (in the boxing profession and out) think would win if both men were in their primes on their best nights). I think without a doubt the vast majority would pick Holyfield.

Again an old Holyfield took Lennox 12 rounds both times (and deserved the decision the second time).

Not quite sure what fight you were watching, but I personally thought that Lewis clearly won the second fight. Except for Riddick Bowe and Mike Tyson, Holyfield didn't fight better competition than Lewis either in my opinion. They both fought Mercer, Foreman and Holmes were both way way way past their primes, and Tommy Morrison and Golota were in my opinion both better fighters than Buster Douglas.

[meade95]

The records of Lewis and Holyfield from 1990 to 1999:

Lewis: 29-1-1, 22 KO's

Notable wins:

TKO 2 Razor Ruddock
UD 12 Tony Tucker
TKO 7 Frank Bruno
TKO 6 Tommy Morrison
MD 10 Ray Mercer (Controversial decision)
TKO 5 Oliver McCall
KO 1 Andrew Golota
TKO 5 Shannon Briggs
UD 12 Evander Holyfield (should have been UD 12 twice)

Notable Losses:

TKO 2 Oliver McCall

Holyfield: 13-4-1, 5 KO's

Notable Wins:

KO 3 Buster Douglas
UD 12 George Foreman
UD 12 Larry Holmes
MD 12 Riddick Bowe
UD 10 Ray Mercer
TKO 11 Mike Tyson
DQ 3 Mike Tyson
TKO 8 Michael Moorer

Notable Losses:

UD 12 Riddick Bowe
MD 12 Michael Moorer
TKO 8 Riddick Bowe
UD 12 Lennox Lewis

In terms of wins and losses, Lewis clearly was the better heavyweight between 1990 and 1999. However, and argument could be made that Holyfield fought overall better competition than Lewis during this time period.

If I have to choose, I would go with Lennox. 29-1-1 against top heavyweight competition with his only loss coming from a one punch KO that he later avenged.

Holyfield's competition is much better then Lennox's - And again, if not for a scoring error (which the judge admitted) Holyfield doesn't have a loss to Moorer....nor did Holyfield lose to Lennox in their second fight (he clearly won that fight...it was a make-up for their first fight.) - Additionally Holyfield was much past his prime by 98,99....while Lennox was in his -

I think it comes down to whom do most people (in the boxing profession and out) think would win if both men were in their primes on their best nights). I think without a doubt the vast majority would pick Holyfield.

Again an old Holyfield took Lennox 12 rounds both times (and deserved the decision the second time).

Not quite sure what fight you were watching, but I personally thought that Lewis clearly won the second fight. .

Tell that to Manny Stewert (Lennox's own trainer) who in several interviews in the Detroit News and Freepress has said he could have easily seen the second fight going to Holyfield ...who pressed the action the entire fight (he was very disappointed in Lennox's performance). That says all one needs to say when Lennox's own trainer suggest he lost.
<P>
Furthermore those at ringside (by like an 80% margin) all thought Holyfield won (when ringside reporters were polled the night of the fight). No way did Lennox win the second fight - He refused to fight! (Vs an old Holyfield).
<P>

[dalek]

lennox won a closish second fight.but he won it fair.the first fight was a one sided easy fight for lennox.the overall competition was not better for evander.tyson whilst still a very good fighter was not the same fighter as before his layoff.holmes and foreman gave him good fights.bert cooper had him all over the place.moorer outpointed him.
lennox would beat holy prime v prime anyway.everyone saying holy just can't accept the fact that at heavy he was an inconsistent performer.imo he's not a top 15 heavyweight.
now consider that evander had lewis's record with the same competition and lennox had evanders.i bet not ONE american voice would pipe up for lennox and nor should they.i think sentimentality is playing a part here.

[meade95]

lennox won a closish second fight.but he won it fair.the first fight was a one sided easy fight for lennox.the overall competition was not better for evander.tyson whilst still a very good fighter was not the same fighter as before his layoff.holmes and foreman gave him good fights.bert cooper had him all over the place.moorer outpointed him.
lennox would beat holy prime v prime anyway.everyone saying holy just can't accept the fact that at heavy he was an inconsistent performer.imo he's not a top 15 heavyweight.
now consider that evander had lewis's record with the same competition and lennox had evanders.i bet not ONE american voice would pipe up for lennox and nor should they.i think sentimentality is playing a part here.

Guess will have to agree to disagree - I don't see how anyone who is willing to be intellectually honest can suggest Lennox won the second fight with Holyfield (an old Holyfield mind you). Even Manny Stewert has said as much after the fact -

Regarding the competition - Both Foreman and Holmes would be favored over anyone Lennox beat outside of Ruddock - Holmes beat a younger Mercer then Lennox beat...and Holmes beat Mercer much easier then Lennox did (Lennox was lucky to escape with a victory in the Mercer fight).

Additionally Holyfield didn't lose to Moorer (without the scoring error) and he easily defeated him upon a rematch - Furthermore a prime Moorer would also be favored over anyone on Lennox's resume outside of Ruddock (and regarding Ruddock his only claim to fame is two LOSSES to Tyson).

The Tyson Holyfield beat would also be highly favored over any of Lennox's resume of beaten fighters - The Tyson Holyfield beat in 1996 was much better then the shell Lennox fought in 2002 - (the two versions of Tyson aren't even comparable in any way).

[Ambling Alp]

I agree with almost all of Meade95's points. I must say that if Holyfield would have got a draw with Moorer in their first fight, it wouldn'thave a good decsion. Moorer deserved it.
However, he makes some good points. Why is Lewis competition regarded so highly? Lewis and Holyfield really split two fights when Holyfield was more than 36, Though Lewsi was more dominating in the first. If they fought a few years earlier, it would have been a different story.
I'm glad some other people are starting to remember that Lewis didn't deserve the decision against Mercer.
I would also like to mention that Bowe did beat Seldon,Tubbs, Biggs,Dokes Thomas, and Donald. These aren't all-time greats, but they aren't that much worse than Ruddock, Bruno, Morrison etc that Lewis beat. And of course he beat Holyfield twice when he was much younger than when Lewis beat him.
Even the fight that Bowe did lose to Holyfield, was very close.
Someone has mentioned that Americans are biased against Lewis. Well, maybe some people are like that but most people atleast are in this forum
seem to be fair to fighters wherever they are from.
Of course there arguements for Lewis as well, many which have been mentioned. It's defintely a close call.

[jezzamundo]

If we are only counting fights in the 90s, I think it goes:
1) Holyfield/Lewis
3) Bowe
4) Tyson

Tysons major achievements were all in the 80s, so he is clearly no4.
Holy is the only A-grade heavy that Bowe fought, and he went 2-1 with him which is pretty impressive. However, he did not dominate for long and was clearly diminished in getting whipped by Golota twice.
Holy lost far too many times (Bowe, Moorer, Lewis) to be a clear No1, but has two massive wins to his name (Bowe and Tyson I) which is something Lewis cannot claim. The first Lewis-Holy fight was a clear robbery that Lewis dominated. The second was a closer fight that I still think Lewis won
although not as well as he should have, as Holy was past his best.
Lewis was probably the most consistent and beat many top heavies, but lost to a B-grade fighter in McCall, and was lackluster in both fights against Holyfield. He lost less than Evander, but with no career defining wins to his name, I have to split first place.

based on entire career accomplishments of the four:
1) Lewis
2) Holyfield
3) Tyson
4) Bowe

[Rory McCloskey]

entire career????

1)TYSON
2)lewis
3)holyfield

[dalek]

lennox won a closish second fight.but he won it fair.the first fight was a one sided easy fight for lennox.the overall competition was not better for evander.tyson whilst still a very good fighter was not the same fighter as before his layoff.holmes and foreman gave him good fights.bert cooper had him all over the place.moorer outpointed him.
lennox would beat holy prime v prime anyway.everyone saying holy just can't accept the fact that at heavy he was an inconsistent performer.imo he's not a top 15 heavyweight.
now consider that evander had lewis's record with the same competition and lennox had evanders.i bet not ONE american voice would pipe up for lennox and nor should they.i think sentimentality is playing a part here.

Guess will have to agree to disagree - I don't see how anyone who is willing to be intellectually honest can suggest Lennox won the second fight with Holyfield (an old Holyfield mind you). Even Manny Stewert has said as much after the fact -

Regarding the competition - Both Foreman and Holmes would be favored over anyone Lennox beat outside of Ruddock - Holmes beat a younger Mercer then Lennox beat...and Holmes beat Mercer much easier then Lennox did (Lennox was lucky to escape with a victory in the Mercer fight).

Additionally Holyfield didn't lose to Moorer (without the scoring error) and he easily defeated him upon a rematch - Furthermore a prime Moorer would also be favored over anyone on Lennox's resume outside of Ruddock (and regarding Ruddock his only claim to fame is two LOSSES to Tyson).

The Tyson Holyfield beat would also be highly favored over any of Lennox's resume of beaten fighters - The Tyson Holyfield beat in 1996 was much better then the shell Lennox fought in 2002 - (the two versions of Tyson aren't even comparable in any way).

can't see a prime moorer beating tua.no way.blow out even in his prime.
i agree the mercer fight could have gone anyway.it was a very close fight could have been scored a draw.

[meade95]

Heck even the Dokes Holyfield beat in 89....would have beaten about everyone on Lennox's list - Dokes was a tough SOB then (and many were talking of him taking on Tyson at the time).

I know Ruddock blew Dokes out several years later (but that was after another drug induced period for Dokes) - I think the Dokes of 89 beats Ruddock -

Heck if Lennox is going to get credit for beating an old T. Tucker and even older Frank Bruno Holyfield deserves credit for beating a younger Pinklon Thomas and an undefeated and prime Alex Stewert -

Holyfield by far faced the better compeition throughout his career. (including CW....which from those ring wars added miles to his odometer).

Lennox was a young 35 for example....while Holyfield was an old 35 -


Overall in terms of the 90's - I'd say -

1. Holyfield
2. Lennox
3. Bowe
4. Tyson


In terms of who'd beat who on their best nights -

1. Holyfield
2. Tyson
3. Bowe
4. Lennox

[dalek]

bowe or holy wouldn't beat lennox.

[Cojimar 1945]

Why would Foreman and Holmes be favored to beat Tony Tucker or Tommy Morrison?

[meade95]

bowe or holy wouldn't beat lennox.

An "old" Holyfield did beat Lennox in their second fight (just ask Lennox's own trainer Manny Stewert) - A prime Holyfield would have pressured Lennox out of the ring - If McCall and Rahman could beat Lennox...a prime Holyfield certainly could/would have (IMO) -

No one who is willing to be intellectually honest can deny that Lennox fought an "old" Holyfield (that isn't Lennox's fault....but it is simply the reality).

[Rory McCloskey]

Why would Foreman and Holmes be favored to beat Tony Tucker or Tommy Morrison?

because foreman and holmes are much better boxers then tony tucker or tommy morrison?

[meade95]

Why would Foreman and Holmes be favored to beat Tony Tucker or Tommy Morrison?

Well Holmes easily beat Mercer...(who destroyed T. Morrison just prior to that fight) - And Foreman of 91 would have KO'd both Tucker and Morrison most likely -

Tucker wasn't a bad win for Lennox - Though Tucker hadn't fought a good HW in years by 1993 when he fought Lennox - Really Tuker's last tough fight prior to that was in his loss to Tyson in 87 (a full six years earlier) - Unless one counts the Split Dec victory over an 19-4 Oliver McCall in early 92 (as a big win) -


Additionally Lennox's (gift) MD victory over Mercer came a full year after Holyfield had already easily defeated Mercer (knocking him down in the process) and a full 4 years since Holmes defeated Mercer (when Mercer was a much better fighter)

Lennox's best win is probably Vs Tua (IMO) - Though the Ruddock victory was another good one -

[wlvrne]

Meade, Lewis' best win was over Tua? That wasn't even a contest as Tua is a 1-dimensional fighter whom we ALL knew that all Lewis had to do to beat him was use his jab and move. It wasn't even close.
And between Mercer and Lewis, I think I had Mercer up by a point. That was a tough fight for Lewis.

[Grimm]

I didn't actually mean out of the 90's.

I meant out of the heavyweights who fought in the 90's.

[wlvrne]

By Grimm's criteria, I've gotta go with Holyfield. Even tho he was 1-2 against Bowe, he had fought tougher competion than either of them.
Most of Tyson's big fights were in the 80's. So, I'm not counting him.

[meade95]

Meade, Lewis' best win was over Tua? That wasn't even a contest as Tua is a 1-dimensional fighter whom we ALL knew that all Lewis had to do to beat him was use his jab and move. It wasn't even close.
And between Mercer and Lewis, I think I had Mercer up by a point. That was a tough fight for Lewis.

Agree completely that Tua was one-dimensional - But in terms of who Lennox beat ......Tua was probably closest to being at the top of his (albeit limited) game - (and even then Tua came in extremely heavy for that fight if I remember correctly)

As for Mercerr....Lennox beat a Mercer whom Holyfield had already dominated over a year earlier...and a Mercer Holmes beat 4 years earlier) - I'd also agree that I had Mercer up 1pt over Lennox as well -

Furthermore the McCall that beat Lennox....Lennox didn't avenge that defeat for more than 3 years later (when McCall was not the same fighter and also going through a whole mental problem deal - Again this wasn't Lennox's fault....but it is still the reality of what type of McCall Lennox did beat)

Lennox size and safety first style would always make him a tough / difficult opponent to fight - But with that said a prime Holyfield runs him out of the ring without a doubt in my mind -

[Cojimar 1945]

I see no reason why Dokes would be favored against the best fighters Lewis faced. There is nothing in his resume to clearly put him ahead the best guys Lewis faced.

[Cojimar 1945]

Holmes and Foreman were 42 when they fought Holyfield. Why should Holyfield get any credit for fighting them whatsoever? A prime Holmes was very good but I am not convinced the Holmes of 1992 could beat Tony Tucker and certain other Lewis victims.

[wlvrne]

Holmes and Foreman were 42 when they fought Holyfield. Why should Holyfield get any credit for fighting them whatsoever? A prime Holmes was very good but I am not convinced the Holmes of 1992 could beat Tony Tucker and certain other Lewis victims.

Go to the other "Holmes' threads, there's plenty of them, if you want to talk about him.
This is about the best fighters in the 90's. Holmes doesn't count. Go away.

[Syntax Error]

IMO, Tyson doesn't figure in the 90's.

Yes he was a champ briefly, in the very early part of 1990 & briefly in 1996, but he was either past his best or in prison.