Evander Holyfield (Lewis 2) vs Oleksandr Usyk (Dubois 2)

[keithmoonhangover]

I cant stand the klitschkos so shame on you for making me defend one

You keep harping on 3 of wlads losses. He reinvented himself after those and went on a historic run. Fixating on those is disingenuous

Do you harp on lennox losing to rahman and mccall and arguably mercer? Bernard hopkins lost his debut and went life and death with mercado before his run.

Im sure youve argued countless times about how fighters nowdays are afraid to take losses while arguing wlads a bum for losing some fights

Yes I keep harping on the tree losses because they happened. One time is one thing. Two is pushing it. Three times says a lot. There is not one heavyweight champion who had this many losses like this and is considered great. Not one.
Reinvented himself? He beat one stiff-mediocre fighter after another. this was nothing "historic about it" except that it went on for so long.

Yes I do count Lewis' losses against him. Have said so many times. Don't him #1. Do rate rate him much, much higher than Klitschko. However, those losses were to nearly as bad of opponents. The McCall fight is a bit of a gray area because the fight should not have been stopped. I do think he should not have been given the decision against Mercer. However, that was a great fight and Lewis performed well. Thats a big difference from being crushed by people like Sanders and Brewster.

We should have the weigh the good against the bad for everyone. Lewis' losses were not as embarrassing gnd there were less of them. . Klitschko's wins were not as good as Lewis wins'. And no, we don't need to go through all the stiffs with pretty records that Klitschko beat. The guy barely survived Samuel Peter.

There might be a reason that W. Klitschko ducked Lennox Lewis. whenever I bring this up, the Klitschko fans never respond.

Okay but what's the rationale for having someone like Lewis with multiple bad losses by kayo no less over the undefeated Usyk? Unilke Holyfield he never beat a prime/near prime great. Holyfield was faded by the time he fought Lewis and Tyson was totally shot. You also clearly don't rate Vitali as great so that's not a great win in your book.

Neither has Usyk. Good, yes. Great, no.

[Cojimar 1946]

Yes I keep harping on the tree losses because they happened. One time is one thing. Two is pushing it. Three times says a lot. There is not one heavyweight champion who had this many losses like this and is considered great. Not one.
Reinvented himself? He beat one stiff-mediocre fighter after another. this was nothing "historic about it" except that it went on for so long.

Yes I do count Lewis' losses against him. Have said so many times. Don't him #1. Do rate rate him much, much higher than Klitschko. However, those losses were to nearly as bad of opponents. The McCall fight is a bit of a gray area because the fight should not have been stopped. I do think he should not have been given the decision against Mercer. However, that was a great fight and Lewis performed well. Thats a big difference from being crushed by people like Sanders and Brewster.

We should have the weigh the good against the bad for everyone. Lewis' losses were not as embarrassing gnd there were less of them. . Klitschko's wins were not as good as Lewis wins'. And no, we don't need to go through all the stiffs with pretty records that Klitschko beat. The guy barely survived Samuel Peter.

There might be a reason that W. Klitschko ducked Lennox Lewis. whenever I bring this up, the Klitschko fans never respond.

Okay but what's the rationale for having someone like Lewis with multiple bad losses by kayo no less over the undefeated Usyk? Unilke Holyfield he never beat a prime/near prime great. Holyfield was faded by the time he fought Lewis and Tyson was totally shot. You also clearly don't rate Vitali as great so that's not a great win in your book.

Neither has Usyk. Good, yes. Great, no.

Sure neither has great wins but given Lewis's two kayo losses one would think that would put him below Usyk for someone who focus heavily on bad losses such as Wlad's to Brewster and Sanders. People of course are free to have whatever criteria they like.

[keithmoonhangover]

Okay but what's the rationale for having someone like Lewis with multiple bad losses by kayo no less over the undefeated Usyk? Unilke Holyfield he never beat a prime/near prime great. Holyfield was faded by the time he fought Lewis and Tyson was totally shot. You also clearly don't rate Vitali as great so that's not a great win in your book.

Neither has Usyk. Good, yes. Great, no.

Sure neither has great wins but given Lewis's two kayo losses one would think that would put him below Usyk for someone who focus heavily on bad losses such as Wlad's to Brewster and Sanders. People of course are free to have whatever criteria they like.

Lewis had the guts to rematch his two losses and avenged them both. Not many boxers can say that.

[gilgamesh]

Yes I keep harping on the tree losses because they happened. One time is one thing. Two is pushing it. Three times says a lot. There is not one heavyweight champion who had this many losses like this and is considered great. Not one.
Reinvented himself? He beat one stiff-mediocre fighter after another. this was nothing "historic about it" except that it went on for so long.

Yes I do count Lewis' losses against him. Have said so many times. Don't him #1. Do rate rate him much, much higher than Klitschko. However, those losses were to nearly as bad of opponents. The McCall fight is a bit of a gray area because the fight should not have been stopped. I do think he should not have been given the decision against Mercer. However, that was a great fight and Lewis performed well. Thats a big difference from being crushed by people like Sanders and Brewster.

We should have the weigh the good against the bad for everyone. Lewis' losses were not as embarrassing gnd there were less of them. . Klitschko's wins were not as good as Lewis wins'. And no, we don't need to go through all the stiffs with pretty records that Klitschko beat. The guy barely survived Samuel Peter.

There might be a reason that W. Klitschko ducked Lennox Lewis. whenever I bring this up, the Klitschko fans never respond.

Okay but what's the rationale for having someone like Lewis with multiple bad losses by kayo no less over the undefeated Usyk? Unilke Holyfield he never beat a prime/near prime great. Holyfield was faded by the time he fought Lewis and Tyson was totally shot. You also clearly don't rate Vitali as great so that's not a great win in your book.

Neither has Usyk. Good, yes. Great, no.

Fury is a great win. Usyk was giving away 40+ pounds and 6 inches to Fury. Fury was the guy to beat for Usyk to become only the 2nd man in Heavyweight history to have become Undisputed Heavyweight Champion after being a Cruiserweight Champion.

I wouldn't rate it quite in the same league as Holyfield's win over Bowe in their rematch, but it's a bigger win than Holyfield over Buster Douglas.

[Cojimar 1946]

Fury might be great H2H but not in terms of accomplishments. I don't think an old Wlad is enough to make him great when he did so little outside that win. You would have to consider guys like Witherspoon and Baer great for Fury to qualify as great.

John Ruiz arguably has a better resume than Fury with wins over old Holyfield, Rahman, Oqundo, Johnson, and Golota

[gilgamesh]

Fury might be great H2H but not in terms of accomplishments. I don't think an old Wlad is enough to make him great when he did so little outside that win. You would have to consider guys like Witherspoon and Baer great for Fury to qualify as great.

John Ruiz arguably has a better resume than Fury with wins over old Holyfield, Rahman, Oqundo, Johnson, and Golota

Ruiz certainly has more name wins, but if you watch any of those fights it wasn't nearly as impressive as it reads. I think Fury would beat Tim Witherspoon 9 times out of 10 to be honest, and the same goes with Baer. They got the power to get him with a big right hand, but otherwise than that he's the better boxer than both of 'em by quite a distance.

[Cojimar 1946]

Maybe but based on accomplishments in their era you would probably have to rate those guys ahead.
In addition to his poor resume Fury never dominated for an extended period. 2015 is the only year he has a strong case for being the top heavyweight.

Plenty of guys today have better times than past Olympic champions but can't even qualify for the Olympics. You don't get rated a great athlete these days for running a 4 minute mile or lifting 400 kg.

[gilgamesh]

I'd definitely rate Fury ahead of Baer or Witherspoon. He was hands down the #1 Heavyweight in the world in 2020 as well.

Anthony Joshua only fought once that year beating Pulev, and had went 1-1 with Andy Ruiz the year prior.

[Cojimar 1946]

I'd definitely rate Fury ahead of Baer or Witherspoon. He was hands down the #1 Heavyweight in the world in 2020 as well.

Anthony Joshua only fought once that year beating Pulev, and had went 1-1 with Andy Ruiz the year prior.

Usyk obviously beats Fury in 2020. Anytime after Usyk's move to heavyweight Fury no longer has a case for being the best

[gilgamesh]

I'd definitely rate Fury ahead of Baer or Witherspoon. He was hands down the #1 Heavyweight in the world in 2020 as well.

Anthony Joshua only fought once that year beating Pulev, and had went 1-1 with Andy Ruiz the year prior.

Usyk obviously beats Fury in 2020. Anytime after Usyk's move to heavyweight Fury no longer has a case for being the best

So Evander Holyfield was the best Heavyweight in the World in 1988 then?

[Cojimar 1946]

I'd definitely rate Fury ahead of Baer or Witherspoon. He was hands down the #1 Heavyweight in the world in 2020 as well.

Anthony Joshua only fought once that year beating Pulev, and had went 1-1 with Andy Ruiz the year prior.

Usyk obviously beats Fury in 2020. Anytime after Usyk's move to heavyweight Fury no longer has a case for being the best

So Evander Holyfield was the best Heavyweight in the World in 1988 then?

Usyk is undefeated at heavyweight, Holyfield was losing to Moorer and Bowe so hardly a comparable situation

Moreover I'd favor the guys Usyk beat at cruiserweight over anyone Fury beat post Wlad at heavyweight. Wilder has a very poor resume and is largely unproven despite the hype.

[gilgamesh]

Usyk obviously beats Fury in 2020. Anytime after Usyk's move to heavyweight Fury no longer has a case for being the best

So Evander Holyfield was the best Heavyweight in the World in 1988 then?

Usyk is undefeated at heavyweight, Holyfield was losing to Moorer and Bowe so hardly a comparable situation

Moreover I'd favor the guys Usyk beat at cruiserweight over anyone Fury beat post Wlad at heavyweight. Wilder has a very poor resume and is largely unproven despite the hype.

To me Fury was the guy in 2020. Usyk became the guy when he beat him. If you wanted to say he was the Top man from the moment he beat Anthony Joshua, and had 3 of the 4 belts that's not out of the question since he ultimately did prove that he was indeed the top man, but I'd still it to Fury for 2020. I don't think that's unfair to either of them.

They both had their time on the top of the Mountain. Usyk's time will ultimately see his legacy elevated a little higher I think, but who the hell knows. Maybe in 5 years time Usyk has lost twice, and Fury has made a comeback going 10-1 or something.

It's Boxing, ya never can tell.

[Cojimar 1946]

Fury ducked too many of his contemporaries to have any sort of convincing claim as the best at any point in time except maybe 2015 and even that's arguable. How can he claim to be the best without beating Usyk, Joshua, Zhang, Kabayel, Joyce, Dubois, Hrgovic, etc? Wilder and Whyte are his best wins since his comeback and beating those guys doesn't prove much

[GordonChen]

Who would win between Joseph Parker or Fabio Wardley?

[gilgamesh]

Who would win between Joseph Parker or Fabio Wardley?

We're about to find out

[keithmoonhangover]

Fury ducked too many of his contemporaries to have any sort of convincing claim as the best at any point in time except maybe 2015 and even that's arguable. How can he claim to be the best without beating Usyk, Joshua, Zhang, Kabayel, Joyce, Dubois, Hrgovic, etc? Wilder and Whyte are his best wins since his comeback and beating those guys doesn't prove much

He beat the number one in the division and that made him the best in the world. If you don't think that's a 'convincing claim', then there truly is no hope for you.

[Cojimar 1946]

By 2015 i would give Wilder and Joshua good odds at beating Wlad. He was getting older and slower and they were prime

He lost to Joshua in his very next fight ffs

[gilgamesh]

By 2015 i would give Wilder and Joshua good odds at beating Wlad. He was getting older and slower and they were prime

He lost to Joshua in his very next fight ffs

I don't think Wilder would've beaten him in 2015. I'm not sure he would've beaten the Wlad of the Joshua fight either. Joshua had quite a bit of difficult himself doing it.

[keithmoonhangover]

By 2015 i would give Wilder and Joshua good odds at beating Wlad. He was getting older and slower and they were prime

He lost to Joshua in his very next fight ffs

There you go again. Rating active boxers isn't about what you think might happen, It's about what did happen. Fury beat the clear #1 in the division, that made him the #1.

[Cojimar 1946]

That has no bearing at all on whether Fury could beat Joshua or other guys in an actual fight in 2015.

If a number 1 guy can't beat the guys below him it's a hollow argument. But it happens all the time like it or not.

If someone wants to argue he was number 1 on paper I don't care enough to argue about it

[gilgamesh]

That has no bearing at all on whether Fury could beat Joshua or other guys in an actual fight in 2015.

If a number 1 guy can't beat the guys below him it's a hollow argument. But it happens all the time like it or not.

If someone wants to argue he was number 1 on paper I don't care enough to argue about it

You don't know that Fury couldn't beat the guys below him though. You just assume he couldn't. He certainly didn't lose to anybody until 2024, so it's certainly not insane to believe he was the man in 2015 because...ya know...he had beaten the reigning Champion of the last 9 years.

Joshua would've been a heavy underdog in 2015 I'd think as he was only 3 years into his Pro career.

[elmersalsa]

It's gonna take a young Holyfield-say, 1990 or 1991, to have a chance to beat Usyk. And I think it's a good chance, but I'd bet Usyk.

I agree. The Evander Holyfield's version that fought Lennox Lewis the second time around was his last hurrah. I think that Holyfield won that fight in my opinion.

But, at 38, Holyfield was up and down. His ring wars were taking its toll.

[gilgamesh]

It's gonna take a young Holyfield-say, 1990 or 1991, to have a chance to beat Usyk. And I think it's a good chance, but I'd bet Usyk.

I agree. The Evander Holyfield's version that fought Lennox Lewis the second time around was his last hurrah. I think that Holyfield won that fight in my opinion.

But, at 38, Holyfield was up and down. His ring wars were taking its toll.

He did better than he had done in the 1st fight with Lewis. It's quite a stretch to say he won it though I'd say. He certainly performed at a World Class level though.

[elmersalsa]

It's gonna take a young Holyfield-say, 1990 or 1991, to have a chance to beat Usyk. And I think it's a good chance, but I'd bet Usyk.

I agree. The Evander Holyfield's version that fought Lennox Lewis the second time around was his last hurrah. I think that Holyfield won that fight in my opinion.

But, at 38, Holyfield was up and down. His ring wars were taking its toll.

He did better than he had done in the 1st fight with Lewis. It's quite a stretch to say he won it though I'd say. He certainly performed at a World Class level though.

I think that they gave the fight to Lennox Lewis because of the fuuckup the judges did in their first fight which Lewis won clearly. They just made up for their mistake.

I believe that Evander Holyfield beat him in a very close match . And Holyfield wasn't in his prime by then.

[gilgamesh]

I thought it was more like a 7 rounds to 5 win for Lennox. As opposed to the 9 rounds to 3 it should've been in their first bout. Statistically he did about the same as he'd done in the first bout Lennox just did a lot less.