Decagon wrote:1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Larry Holmes
4. Jack Johnson
5. Joe Frazier
6. Sonny Liston
7. George Foreman 8. Evander Holyfield
9. Rocky Marciano 10. Lennox Lewis
11. Jack Dempsey 12. Mike Tyson
There are two ways of ranking fighters; based on what they did, and what they might have done. Holyfield beat better fighters than Lewis or Tyson. If the three of them each faced Sonny Liston, who knows who would get the better of him? Maybe all of them; maybe none of them. Lewis had an excellent style, but those two knockout losses keep him from being in my top five. Holyfield and Tyson had bad losses in their respective primes, as well, and each of them had their poor performances where they forced out a win. Tyson's the type of guy who could beat any fighter who ever lived, but could lose to any fighter who ever lived. Lewis in his prime was a bit more careful. Holyfield did the most, so that's why I voted for him.
Beautiful list, I agree almost to a T.
Only thing I object to is Frazier being higher than Foreman, I would switch the two, but still, excellent list.
Tyson will be remembered the best. He was the best to watch as well.
Holyfield has the best career wins by far. His wins over Bowe and Tyson are worth more than any of Tyson or Lewis's wins.
Lewis has the best record clearly. Tyson faded badly in the 90s, Holyfield has a pretty dodgy record as a heavyweight, with losses to Moorer, Bowe, Lewis and Ruiz. Lewis beat everyone, but never had a career defining win like Holyfield did.
[quote="elmersalsa"][size=18]There is NO DOUBT that Holyfield is the greatest fighter of the 3. Tyson though, was the most FAMOUS and with the greater impact
I put it like this:
1. Best of the 3 pound per pound: Holyfield
2. Most Historical and with greater impact: Tyson
3. Better record of the 3 and probably more dominant: Lewis[/size][/quote]
That's really it in a nutshell, so once again, I'll have to agree with elmersalsa.
silkov wrote:Holyfield without a doubt for me... more heart and better mentality than Tyson, better all round skills than Lewis.... would have beaten Lewis had they fought in the early to mid 90s... would always have beaten Tyson because he had the bigger heart and the stronger will, plus the better boxing brain....
You must be joking, Lewis had far better skills than Holyfield.
silkov wrote:
Holyfield without a doubt for me... more heart and better mentality than Tyson, better all round skills than Lewis.... would have beaten Lewis had they fought in the early to mid 90s... would always have beaten Tyson because he had the bigger heart and the stronger will, plus the better boxing brain....
You must be joking, Lewis had far better skills than Holyfield.
I am really not sure about a Holyfield-Lewis matchup in the early or mid 90s. If Lewis only fought as well as he did in his two fights against Holyfield, then I say Holyfield wins. However, I believe that Lewis underperformed in both fights, he was overly defensive in the 1st and over confident in the 2nd. I feel that if he brought his A-game Lewis would beat Holyfied at any point in time. And yes, I agree that Lewis had the better skills than Holyfield, he just didn't always use them to the best of his ability.
elmersalsa wrote:There is NO DOUBT that Holyfield is the greatest fighter of the 3. Tyson though, was the most FAMOUS and with the greater impact
I put it like this:
1. Best of the 3 pound per pound: Holyfield
2. Most Historical and with greater impact: Tyson
3. Better record of the 3 and probably more dominant: Lewis
That's really it in a nutshell, so once again, I'll have to agree with elmersalsa.
I have a reputation for "ridin the fence" at times. However these guys have figured a way to store all the fence posts precisely where the sun don't shine.
Aren't you the big Gamache fan, BoxBuzz? That guy was a bum. Stick that one up your ass.
Lewis wasn't more skilled than Holyfield. Holyfield would have KOed Lewis (Tyson too) had they fought in '92. Make no mistake, Holyfield had been thru the wars by 2000. That was Holyfield WAY on the down side, and he still gave Lewis a lesson on the jab, and how to defend it, in their rematch...a lesson he was too slow to learn as we saw in Rahman-Lewis I.
Now hold on just one minute there Proffesor........first of all Yes I was a little bit hopin that my local boy Joey could make a splash instead of a rather loud thud....guilty on that count...
.....AND.....I never said I disagreed with your shared answer just that you were able to duck the question I was posing......possibly even better than I could have. And for that I chose a rather "graphic" and unique method of description.
But it was never meant to offend, or in any real way..."invade" your personal uh...space. I was of course referring to an appropriate shed of some sort..
I'm amazed and pleased with the numbers on the poll. I think I felt that Tyson would do better numbers on this question. Good to see that a balanced sense of reality prevails here.
silkov wrote:
Holyfield without a doubt for me... more heart and better mentality than Tyson, better all round skills than Lewis.... would have beaten Lewis had they fought in the early to mid 90s... would always have beaten Tyson because he had the bigger heart and the stronger will, plus the better boxing brain....
You must be joking, Lewis had far better skills than Holyfield.
I am really not sure about a Holyfield-Lewis matchup in the early or mid 90s. If Lewis only fought as well as he did in his two fights against Holyfield, then I say Holyfield wins. However, I believe that Lewis underperformed in both fights, he was overly defensive in the 1st and over confident in the 2nd. I feel that if he brought his A-game Lewis would beat Holyfied at any point in time. And yes, I agree that Lewis had the better skills than Holyfield, he just didn't always use them to the best of his ability.
jezza
If Lewis can't bring his right frame of mind for his two fights with a ring worn Holyfield then what chance as he got against a prime Holyfield? Lewis has strength and power over Holyfield and he could make those count but having seen the fights that actually happened I can only imagine that Holyfield would fare better in a prime-for-prime match up.
If Lewis can't bring his right frame of mind for his two fights with a ring worn Holyfield then what chance as he got against a prime Holyfield? Lewis has strength and power over Holyfield and he could make those count but having seen the fights that actually happened I can only imagine that Holyfield would fare better in a prime-for-prime match up.
I know what you mean. Holy was obviously below par in the first fight, but Lewis was clearly having one of his ultra-defensive nights because he felt that Holy would be better than anyone he had faced before.
However, in the second fight Holy was much better and performed to the best of his ability (although this ability was diminished compared to his early and mid 90s performances). Lewis had such an easy time in the 1st fight that he took the 2nd too lightly. I saw him as leading the fight clearly after a few rounds, but then he got lazy with his defense and paid the price. It was a close fight that I score for Lewis, but if Lewis had fought to the best of his ability he would have won clearly IMO.
Prime for prime is really hard to tell, but I really think that in the 2nd fight, Lewis was performing just as much off his best as Holyfield was.
