BoxRec

Like I said, excuses, excuses...it didn't take long for the excuses to come out in abundance!

1. Holmes
2. Holyfield
3. Lewis
4. Tyson
5. Bowe

I think Bowe would have beaten Tyson on his day but he just didn't achieve enough.

At his best Bowe would have given any fighter in hsitory a hell of a fight, but that same thing can be said of most very, very good heavyweights. On his best night he was simply great, but he just did not last long enough.

Lennox Lewis IMO, people always say Holmes was underated i think lewis is one of the most underated heavyweights ever, well on this board at least.

i have to agree with Barry here, prime Mike Tyson v prime Holmes ends up the same way as their fight when larry was 38, Mikes way to fast and powerful.
the only reason i would give Lennox a better chance than larry against mike is because he could hit just as hard.

Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson? When people summon up an image of Mike they remeber him landing those KO punches they forget how easily he was controlled and manhandled.

Holmes, Lewis and Bowe all have great styles for beating Tyson. Tyson's best chance is against Lennox because he could be KO'd.

Once Tyson lost a few round against Holmes and was on the end of that jab he'd be looking for a way out.

Ezzard wrote:Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson? When people summon up an image of Mike they remeber him landing those KO punches they forget how easily he was controlled and manhandled.

Holmes, Lewis and Bowe all have great styles for beating Tyson. Tyson's best chance is against Lennox because he could be KO'd.

Once Tyson lost a few round against Holmes and was on the end of that jab he'd be looking for a way out.

Beating Tyson seems so easy reading your post.... on the other end of that jab and everything falls into place.

cultus wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson? When people summon up an image of Mike they remeber him landing those KO punches they forget how easily he was controlled and manhandled.

Holmes, Lewis and Bowe all have great styles for beating Tyson. Tyson's best chance is against Lennox because he could be KO'd.

Once Tyson lost a few round against Holmes and was on the end of that jab he'd be looking for a way out.

Beating Tyson seems so easy reading your post.... on the other end of that jab and everything falls into place.

Isn't that what happened? Tyson either totally destoryed people or he folded when he met resistance. If Tyson loses 2 back-to-back rounds he loses the fight. Tyson has the physical skills, no doubt about that, he just doesn't have the psychological strength to come back in a fight.

Ezzard wrote:

cultus wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson? When people summon up an image of Mike they remeber him landing those KO punches they forget how easily he was controlled and manhandled.

Holmes, Lewis and Bowe all have great styles for beating Tyson. Tyson's best chance is against Lennox because he could be KO'd.

Once Tyson lost a few round against Holmes and was on the end of that jab he'd be looking for a way out.

Beating Tyson seems so easy reading your post.... on the other end of that jab and everything falls into place.

Isn't that what happened? Tyson either totally destoryed people or he folded when he met resistance. If Tyson loses 2 back-to-back rounds he loses the fight. Tyson has the physical skills, no doubt about that, he just doesn't have the psychological strength to come back in a fight.

Tyrell used his jab and had better movement and overall skill than Buster and it did work for the first rounds till Tyson wrecked his body. you wanna say that this Tyson would have not beaten any version of Buster the muster?

This is not meant to be a "debate" thread. It says "once and for all"

So once and for all......Larry Holmes.

Now go find some other threads to rifle through. This one is kaput, complete, finis! Go on!....there's nothing to see here.....go on home to you wives and families....or get back to work.

Ezzard wrote:1. Holmes
2. Holyfield
3. Lewis
4. Tyson
5. Bowe

I think Bowe would have beaten Tyson on his day but he just didn't achieve enough.

Dude Lewis should be rated past that blown up cruiserweight.

I'm one of the only two who voted for Lewis!

Holy struggled with very talented big HW's like Bowe and Lewis.

Holy struggled with very talented big HW's like Bowe and Lewis.

wasnt holyfield well past his prime in the 2 lewis fights yet many people think holy won the 2nd fight?

>>>Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson?<<<

Holyfield fought the fight of his life against Tyson. I don't care how old he was, he was never better except possibly at cruiserweight, but against Tyson was the best Holyfield ever fought at heavyweight.

barry wrote:>>>Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson?<<<

Holyfield fought the fight of his life against Tyson. I don't care how old he was, he was never better except possibly at cruiserweight, but against Tyson was the best Holyfield ever fought at heavyweight.

i agree holy was defintley in his prime vs tyson. it was his peak fight at heavyweight, or are u going to sit here and tell me his best fight at heavyweight was losing to bowe or moorer, and having trouble with a well well past his prime foreman?

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

barry wrote:>>>Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson?<<<

Holyfield fought the fight of his life against Tyson. I don't care how old he was, he was never better except possibly at cruiserweight, but against Tyson was the best Holyfield ever fought at heavyweight.

i agree holy was defintley in his prime vs tyson. it was his peak fight at heavyweight, or are u going to sit here and tell me his best fight at heavyweight was losing to bowe or moorer, and having trouble with a well well past his prime foreman?

Yes, I am. He'd been in some terrific wars that had taken a lot out of him. he pulled hismelf back for those fights but he was obviously past his prime. Are you going to sit there and tell me that Tyson was past his peak at 24? Come on, we could go on like this forever.

My pioint really is that Tyson was as close to his prime (if not closer) than Holyfield. When anyone else loses a fight it goes against them in some way, when Tyson loses one there's a million extenutaing circumstances. His fighting style made him popular. he was a breath of fresh air for boxing when he first started out but he was beaten by a better man and then quit in the rematch.

In all fairness, he didn't quit in the rematch...he just went nuts.

barry wrote:In all fairness, he didn't quit in the rematch...he just went nuts.

I think he's been pretty much nuts all along. The biting was a way to get out without actually quiting. Kind of like Golota and the flagrant low blows against Bowe.

The Great John L wrote:

barry wrote:In all fairness, he didn't quit in the rematch...he just went nuts.

I think he's been pretty much nuts all along. The biting was a way to get out without actually quiting. Kind of like Golota and the flagrant low blows against Bowe.

It was his version of quitting. He knew what he was doing. He didn't want to get beat up again.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Holy struggled with very talented big HW's like Bowe and Lewis.

wasnt holyfield well past his prime in the 2 lewis fights yet many people think holy won the 2nd fight?

Bullcrap he was still beating guys unifying the titles even though he wasn't the linear. Holy did better but didn't win.

Ezzard wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

barry wrote:>>>Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson?<<<

Holyfield fought the fight of his life against Tyson. I don't care how old he was, he was never better except possibly at cruiserweight, but against Tyson was the best Holyfield ever fought at heavyweight.

i agree holy was defintley in his prime vs tyson. it was his peak fight at heavyweight, or are u going to sit here and tell me his best fight at heavyweight was losing to bowe or moorer, and having trouble with a well well past his prime foreman?

Yes, I am. He'd been in some terrific wars that had taken a lot out of him. he pulled hismelf back for those fights but he was obviously past his prime. Are you going to sit there and tell me that Tyson was past his peak at 24? Come on, we could go on like this forever.

My pioint really is that Tyson was as close to his prime (if not closer) than Holyfield. When anyone else loses a fight it goes against them in some way, when Tyson loses one there's a million extenutaing circumstances. His fighting style made him popular. he was a breath of fresh air for boxing when he first started out but he was beaten by a better man and then quit in the rematch.

so the Tyson who fought Holy was basically the same that fought in the 1980's?. Holy had been fighting regulary. Tyson had been off it 5 years.
Inactivity was the biggest bitch in the ring against Mike that night.

Im not disputing that when he fought Buster, Tyson was the better man in that situation. Im just saiyng that this fight wasn't the whole truth like you claim it to be. ou yes the guy with a jab n stuff and it's all over..

and he showed no mental weakness in that fight.. he did not collapse.. even losing first rounds. He fought to the end.

cultus wrote:
so the Tyson who fought Holy was basically the same that fought in the 1980's?.

No, why are you saying this? Tyson's style meant he was probably always going to burn out quite early. BUT he had taken far fewer punches and been in far fewer wars than Holyfield at this point in their careers.

Why are you trying to attribute this argument to me? I know you're a Tyson fan, that's great, but don't make my stance up, at least address what I'm saying.

cultus wrote: Holy had been fighting regulary. Tyson had been off it 5 years.
Inactivity was the biggest bitch in the ring against Mike that night.

You do have a point here. Tyson had been inactive but this can work in a number of ways. You could interpret this as Tyson having rested his body for 5 years whilst Holy was enagaging in some great give and take battles that were taking their toll on his body.

Like I say, you have a point I am just offerign a different, but valid, interpretation

cultus wrote: and he showed no mental weakness in that fight.. he did not collapse.. even losing first rounds. He fought to the end.

Well he couldn't turn a losing situation into a winning one. Louis managed to do it, Marciano managed to do it on a number of occassions, Liston managed it, Ali almsot made it a trademark, Holmes did it, Holyfield did it... This is why I rate these men as great champions. No matter what happened in the ring, no matter who they fought they always had a good chance of winning becasue they proved they could overcome adversity.

tyson took lots of punchs to the face before falling to any one

Lennox Lewis. Holmes had been blessed with a lot of mediocre opposition.

[quote="barry"]>>>Why won't anyone accept that a ringworn Holyfield beat Tyson?<<<

Holyfield fought the fight of his life against Tyson. I don't care how old he was, he was never better except possibly at cruiserweight, but against Tyson was the best Holyfield ever fought at heavyweight.[/quote]

Nah. His best performance at heavyweight was against Douglas...or maybe Stewart I. Holyfield was in decline (29 or 30 yrs old) from Bowe-Holyfield I on out (Holyfield-Bowe II wasn't Holyfield at his best either...he'd already lost an edge by then, noticably so). Tyson never faced a prime Holyfield...he ran away to prison...Douglas was left holding that bag. Lewis definitely never faced a prime Holyfield. Bowe came along when Holyfield hit 30.

1. Holyfield (came to heavyweights late...still great...imagine a 25 yr old EH, in his prime, at heavyweight...bye, bye, Mikey)
2. Holmes (his opposition bored me to death)
3. Lewis (underrated, no doubt)
4. Bowe (immense size, and physical talent nurtured by Eddie Futch)
5. Tyson (overrated, no doubt)

Yeah...Tyson ran away to prison so he could stay away from Holyfield for four, or five years...

Holyfield's best against Douglas, or Stewart...I don't think so...neither were anything near to what Tyson was, even at that late point in his career. People can try to make all the excuses they want, but Holyfield fought the fight of his life that night...Holyfield knows it and so does Tyson. If Douglas had came into his fight with Tyson in the same shape he did against Holyfield then he would have been meat...early and Stewart, well Tyson beat him before the bell even rang yet he gave Holyfield a hell of a fight!

>>>Yeah, just like Tony Tucker was.<<<

What does that have to do with Tyson, Holfied, Douglas and Stewart? Are you trying to say that Tucker went the distance with Tyson, because if that's the case, he went the distance with Lennox Lewis as well!