Where does Evander Holyfield rank among all time great Heavyweights?

[Ambling Alp II]

Anyone whi thinks Vitali and Wlad belong in the same league as Evander is kidding themselves, wlad. Would have never been a chapuon in the nineties. Prevprison Tyson, Holyfield Leeis and Bowe beat him. Tua and Ine Fireman and Mercer abd Holmes have a chabce too. I know people on here like Vitali but i watched the Lewis fight withlut HBO commenty. Lewis would have won that fight anyway. Holyfield best 5 results are better than anything o. Either brothers resume.

A lot of typos, but you are on the money.

[margaret thatcher]

the passion to debate klit vs other hws so strong that it bumped this thread after 10 years

[Ambling Alp II]

Anyway, Holyfield is probably in the #3-8 range. Ali and Louis have to be #1 and #2. After that, it's close between several guys - Foreman, Johnson, Frazier, Holmes, Lewis, and Holyfield himself. you could probably argue for Dempsey and Marciano. Liston and Tyson are a little behind them.

People always seem to overlook some of Holyfield's best performances. He looked great in the fights before he fought Douglas - Tillis, Thomas, Dokes etc. We never talk about those fights.

We also overlook some of the things that made him great;
-His accuracy. In his prime, he consistently landed clean punches. He was up there with Ali and Louis in that regard.
-He was also versatile in that he could box or go toe to toe.

[elmersalsa]

Evander Holyfield was probably the most complete boxer ever at heavyweight.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

- Oh, dear, the mythology of Evan yet again for the umpteenth X is it???

200lb record is 26-10-2, 14 KO with 3 KO losses with a 37% of his fights won by KO

190lb Qawi put him in ICU their first fight.

Used to love Vander, but he stunk out his hanging on delusional years thinking he was gonna unify the Heavy division. Some how went broke in spite being in one the richest purse eras of heavywt boxing.

Terribly, nay horribly embarrassed by retired MMA Vitor Belfort while attempting a Tyson exhibition career.

Had he stay retired with a "Hard Heart" after Moorer beat him, he might have kept a semblance of his health, wealth and reputation.

I'm no huge fan of Evander Holyfield, I'm not going to go into the reasons, you probably hold similar views, judging by your invoking the infamous 'Evan'.

But how on earth do you find anything derogatory in beating Qawi in his 11th pro fight in one of the best fights of the 80's?

- It's not derogatory, just the facts that the 190lb stump of Qawi put him in ICU.

When Michael Spinks fought Qawi, he not only beat him out of his LH title, but sent him to the new Cruiser division where he got his revenge with poor Leon. The first Vander drug accusations were made by Qawi .

Vander is a sad story of boxing keeping a fighter with clearly diminished abilities fighting propped up. As to the Valuev fight, that was a DKing fraud. The Swiss didn't even have a Boxing Commish. Valuev at ring center didn't want to even hit Vander who was mostly a statue.

Towards the end, Valuev bulled Vander to a corner where he literally disappeared behind the flying elbows of Valuev who was pulling his punches the whole way just to show what he could've done to poor Vander before turning around to walk back to ring center.

[gilgamesh]

Evander was robbed against Valuev. As for his Drug accusations. I simply don't care, and it has no bearing on his ranking to me. None of his results were ever overturned so then you just have people that wish to arbitrarily act as if his whole career didn't matter because of what they think he did.

I go by what I saw him do.

[Ambling Alp II]

He once made the drug accusations against Holyfield in the same post that he praised the Klitschko's. Seriously. The Valuev fight means nothing in regard to Holyfield's career. The Qawi fight was the best cruiserweight fight ever, for what that is worth.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

He once made the drug accusations against Holyfield in the same post that he praised the Klitschko's. Seriously. The Valuev fight means nothing in regard to Holyfield's career. The Qawi fight was the best cruiserweight fight ever, for what that is worth.

- I agree, that first Qawi fight was epic, but me mentioning two provable episodes where drug use was charged is factual.

Now, the reason Vander record is so numerically bad is because of all the Big Four of Tyson, Lewis, Bowe, and Vander, he fought them all multiple times. Then he hung on stinking out the ring with his headbutting, preaching, ect. Then he thought he could draw $$$ like Tyson did in exhibitions, but he's simply too shot

Wlad never had any legit drug accusations, and in fact was a victim of drugging in the first Brewster fight where the gaming houses suspended wagering because a huge bet from the UK on Brewster who was a nobody was a strong indication of a fix. Wlad mysteriously collapses after taking zero punishment, and then the corrupt Vegas Commish managed to "lose" his drug test that showed all kinds of abnormalities.

The only legit drug accusation against Vit was the Olympics where Wlad replaced him. Ukrainian hatred and or denial here is strong after they now have dominated the heavy top spots since the turn of the Century.

Now, keep in mind the current nanogram drug testing has not cleared up anything, esp after l'l floydy needed an altered Vegas Scorecard and a 2 week back dated TUE so wagers could be claimed for the Manny fight. That non fight resulted in over a $$$ hundred million worth of lawsuits that failed because boxing is do dirty.

[Cojimar 1946]

Holyfield was inconsistent and never clearly established himself as the best heavyweight in the world.

That has to count against him legacy wise.

[gilgamesh]

Holyfield was inconsistent and never clearly established himself as the best heavyweight in the world.

That has to count against him legacy wise.

He also faced the fiercest level of competition of any Heavyweight not named Muhammad Ali. That has to give him a big boost legacy wise.

[Ambling Alp II]

Most people considered him the best for about 2 years from 1990-1992. He was arguably the best for other periods of time in a very strong era. If you take his first 10 years of his hw career, (1988-1997) he was the best hw overall.

He really wasn't inconsistent. Outside of the first Moorer fight, he never looked bad until he got old.
He is certainly in the Top 10.

[gilgamesh]

Most people considered him the best for about 2 years from 1990-1992. He was arguably the best for other periods of time in a very strong era. If you take his first 10 years of his hw career, (1988-1997) he was the best hw overall.

He really wasn't inconsistent. Outside of the first Moorer fight, he never looked bad until he got old.
He is certainly in the Top 10.

He didn't really look bad against Moorer either. It's not his best night, but I've seen fighters look worse and get the scorecards in their favor.

[Cojimar 1946]

Holyfield was inconsistent and never clearly established himself as the best heavyweight in the world.

That has to count against him legacy wise.

He also faced the fiercest level of competition of any Heavyweight not named Muhammad Ali. That has to give him a big boost legacy wise.

I think the entire era is heavily overrated based on the presence of Mike Tyson. Lewis and Holyfields legacies would suffer dramatically if Tyson didn't exist or retired undefeated without fighting them.

If the era is so special people should be able to better point to specific attributes this era had lacking in other supposedly lesser eras

[Cojimar 1946]

Most people considered him the best for about 2 years from 1990-1992. He was arguably the best for other periods of time in a very strong era. If you take his first 10 years of his hw career, (1988-1997) he was the best hw overall.

He really wasn't inconsistent. Outside of the first Moorer fight, he never looked bad until he got old.
He is certainly in the Top 10.

Bowe had some good performances during that period though. You would have to give him good odds of beating Holyfield from late 1990 onwards.

[gilgamesh]

Holyfield was inconsistent and never clearly established himself as the best heavyweight in the world.

That has to count against him legacy wise.

He also faced the fiercest level of competition of any Heavyweight not named Muhammad Ali. That has to give him a big boost legacy wise.

I think the entire era is heavily overrated based on the presence of Mike Tyson. Lewis and Holyfields legacies would suffer dramatically if Tyson didn't exist or retired undefeated without fighting them.

If the era is so special people should be able to better point to specific attributes this era had lacking in other supposedly lesser eras

It had better, more accomplished fighters. Beating Tyson is a much bigger boost for Holyfield than it was for Lewis. I don't think Lewis' legacy is affected all that bad without having beaten Mike. At least not to real fans, maybe it hurts his standing to the general public but then again the general public still says Tyson is better than him and Holyfield so what do they know?

Mike Tyson is the 4th best fighter of the 90's. He'd be #1 in most eras. He's #2 in the 80's only because of Holmes.

[Cojimar 1946]

If it was so great guys like Moorer and old Foreman should have been kept away from the title. And the top guys should have been able to avoid losing to massive underdogs over and over.

The 90s probably feature the worst lineal champs since Michael Spinks. All this despite fighting rarely and blatant ducking.

Imagine how bad things would have been if they were actually active. Maybe we would have got to see Jimmy Thunder win the championship. I'm curious if the eras apologists would have been able to explain that away.

[gilgamesh]

If it was so great guys like Moorer and old Foreman should have been kept away from the title. And the top guys should have been able to avoid losing to massive underdogs over and over.

The 90s probably feature the worst lineal champs since Michael Spinks. All this despite fighting rarely and blatant ducking.

Imagine how bad things would have been if they were actually active. Maybe we would have got to see Jimmy Thunder win the championship. I'm curious if the eras apologists would have been able to explain that away.

The eras doesn't need apologists. It was great. It is funny though that people at the time complained about it. Just like they complain about the modern era.

Old George Foreman would've beaten many Heavyweight Champions prior to 1994.

[p4p1]

If it was so great guys like Moorer and old Foreman should have been kept away from the title. And the top guys should have been able to avoid losing to massive underdogs over and over.

The 90s probably feature the worst lineal champs since Michael Spinks. All this despite fighting rarely and blatant ducking.

Imagine how bad things would have been if they were actually active. Maybe we would have got to see Jimmy Thunder win the championship. I'm curious if the eras apologists would have been able to explain that away.

The eras doesn't need apologists. It was great. It is funny though that people at the time complained about it. Just like they complain about the modern era.

Old George Foreman would've beaten many Heavyweight Champions prior to 1994.

The punching power he carried into his 40s always levelled the field. Everyone, regardless of where they were ranked had to fight him carefully, which often meant at a slower pace than they normally would. His age and experience meant he was better in some aspects that he was in his physical prime.
He told Larry Merchant that at one point, late in the fight, Michael Moorer would stand in front of him and he would knock him out. Young George doesn't have that wisdom, but young George also wouldn't have needed to wait. I think you can use GF to argue the 90s wasn't as strong as the 70s, but you can't use him to argue that the 90s was weak when compared to other eras. Old man Foreman was still a tough ask for just about anyone, great chin, huge punching power and the years had made him a fairly smart fighter.

Just by the eye test you can see there were a lot of good to great fighters around in the 90s.

[Cojimar 1946]

If it was so great guys like Moorer and old Foreman should have been kept away from the title. And the top guys should have been able to avoid losing to massive underdogs over and over.

The 90s probably feature the worst lineal champs since Michael Spinks. All this despite fighting rarely and blatant ducking.

Imagine how bad things would have been if they were actually active. Maybe we would have got to see Jimmy Thunder win the championship. I'm curious if the eras apologists would have been able to explain that away.

The eras doesn't need apologists. It was great. It is funny though that people at the time complained about it. Just like they complain about the modern era.

Old George Foreman would've beaten many Heavyweight Champions prior to 1994.

It would have presumably been greater if the top guys didn't have such embarrassing losses. Imagine Usyk getting kayoed by Chisora or Whyte for example. What's great about losing to Bowe and Moorer? People who believe the era is great presumably feel the need to defend the top guys having such bad losses. Given that's the default in other eras.

As far as complaining goes I presume the inactivity and ducking are things fans should complain about. Like Bowe not fighting Lewis, Tyson, Witherspoon, Tucker etc and Lewis not fighting Holyfield and Tyson earlier.

The 90s being great is a gen X thing. It's not true of other generations generally and with good reason.

[Cojimar 1946]

It's even more bizarre given how many big fights didn't happen. The era is far more memorable for all the big fights that never took place than the few that did.

[gilgamesh]

If it was so great guys like Moorer and old Foreman should have been kept away from the title. And the top guys should have been able to avoid losing to massive underdogs over and over.

The 90s probably feature the worst lineal champs since Michael Spinks. All this despite fighting rarely and blatant ducking.

Imagine how bad things would have been if they were actually active. Maybe we would have got to see Jimmy Thunder win the championship. I'm curious if the eras apologists would have been able to explain that away.

The eras doesn't need apologists. It was great. It is funny though that people at the time complained about it. Just like they complain about the modern era.

Old George Foreman would've beaten many Heavyweight Champions prior to 1994.

It would have presumably been greater if the top guys didn't have such embarrassing losses. Imagine Usyk getting kayoed by Chisora or Whyte for example. What's great about losing to Bowe and Moorer? People who believe the era is great presumably feel the need to defend the top guys having such bad losses. Given that's the default in other eras.

As far as complaining goes I presume the inactivity and ducking are things fans should complain about. Like Bowe not fighting Lewis, Tyson, Witherspoon, Tucker etc and Lewis not fighting Holyfield and Tyson earlier.

The 90s being great is a gen X thing. It's not true of other generations generally and with good reason.

For one thing Holyfield's losses to Bowe are some of the all time great Heavyweight slugfests. If anything the loss in their 1st contest kinda raised his legacy a bit as it's one of the absolute best Heavyweight Title bouts of all time.

There's nothing embarrassing about losing to Riddick Bowe. Riddick Bowe was a great fighter. He lacked the discipline to get the most out of his talent, but the talent was undeniably there.

[gilgamesh]

It's even more bizarre given how many big fights didn't happen. The era is far more memorable for all the big fights that never took place than the few that did.

There's only a few that come to mind that didn't happen.

Bowe vs Lewis being the big one.

[Cojimar 1946]

It's even more bizarre given how many big fights didn't happen. The era is far more memorable for all the big fights that never took place than the few that did.

There's only a few that come to mind that didn't happen.

Bowe vs Lewis being the big one.

Lewis and Holyfield are the only top heavyweights of that era that routinely faced other top contenders. Other guys did it rarely or never. The era takes a massive hit in terms of action and excitement if most of the division is so averse to taking challenges.

McCall didn't fight Tua, Mercer, Holyfield, Witherspoon, Vitali, Tyson, Moorer etc despite being around the entire decade and having the opportunity to fight all of them.

Oliver McCall somehow missed o

[gilgamesh]

It's even more bizarre given how many big fights didn't happen. The era is far more memorable for all the big fights that never took place than the few that did.

There's only a few that come to mind that didn't happen.

Bowe vs Lewis being the big one.

Lewis and Holyfield are the only top heavyweights of that era that routinely faced other top contenders. Other guys did it rarely or never. The era takes a massive hit in terms of action and excitement if most of the division is so averse to taking challenges.

McCall didn't fight Tua, Mercer, Holyfield, Witherspoon, Vitali, Tyson, Moorer etc despite being around the entire decade and having the opportunity to fight all of them.

Oliver McCall somehow missed o

To be fair after his crying fit in the Lewis rematch I'm pretty sure he was pretty much not even considered for any more big matchups, and rightfully so.

[Ambling Alp II]

It's even more bizarre given how many big fights didn't happen. The era is far more memorable for all the big fights that never took place than the few that did.

There's only a few that come to mind that didn't happen.

Bowe vs Lewis being the big one.

Lewis and Holyfield are the only top heavyweights of that era that routinely faced other top contenders. Other guys did it rarely or never. The era takes a massive hit in terms of action and excitement if most of the division is so averse to taking challenges.

McCall didn't fight Tua, Mercer, Holyfield, Witherspoon, Vitali, Tyson, Moorer etc despite being around the entire decade and having the opportunity to fight all of them.

Oliver McCall somehow missed o

McCall? That is your big complaint?
Witherspoon and Vitali were not the top guys at the time anyway.

Next to the 1970s, it was probably the best decade for heavyweight boxing. Could have been better if a more key fights would have happened. But there was a lot of excitement in the hw division back then. Boxing was not a fringe sport like it is today. A lot of people still followed it because in great part because the heavyweight division was exciting.