BoxRec

Well, sanity prevailed then, the result is what is to be expected. Sultan probably showed Holy a bit too much respect, the man is a living legend after all.

I think it's time that steps were taken to stop Holyfield tilting at windmills. For effs sake, he's 45 and he's not going to get any better at this stage. He has no business being in the ring with men 15 years his junior who are world class, he could get terribly battered, and what state is he going to be in in five years time, ten years time, even if he retires.

It's about time there was a cutoff for fighters over 40, whereby unless they'd beaten someone rated in the top 10 in the last year, they cannot fight for a title. That way they would probably be protected from entering the ring against some young lion.

I think there should be a seniors circuit - with a seniors world title. A title holder of this is elligable to fight the youngsters for the big title.

stujones wrote:I think there should be a seniors circuit - with a seniors world title. A title holder of this is elligable to fight the youngsters for the big title.

I thought that myself Stu, but then thought why should there be another so called "World title" being it seniors, to add to the mess it is already in?

Also, it's not impossible for a "Senior" to win the proper World title, like Foreman proved. I think they should have to get themselves into the frame like anyone younger than them should to get their shot again by earning it. Not that it works that way, as we seen how Holyfield got his shot tonight.

Rather than having a seniors world title in with the main 4, I'd much rather it was just one belt like the old days of Jack Johnsons belt, when having the belt meant you were the World Champion rather than 4 claiming to be and a senior World Champion wanting his crack at the youngsters too

I know what your staying as I thought that, but fact of the matter is if they want to box on at 44-45, they will have to take it on the chin that they are not as good anymore to be the World Champion, or be as good as their hayday, unless a freak shock happens again like Foreman pulled.

Seniors would tempt fighters to fight on even more, if it was up tp Holyfield, he'd probably retire when he was 50 and go in seniors till 60, so don't think it's a smart idea.

Terry D wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote:What a shitty ass fight.

Holy had the opportunity to hurt Sultan but just kept walking at him.

Holy was always overrated anyway because of his heart. All he had was good speed and headmovement In his prime.

That is the biggest load of nonsense. Did you ever watch him as a Cruiserweight? If you cannot see what made him Commander Evander you never will and there is no point trying to convince you how good he once was, pre-2004 of course.

No I watched him as a Heavyweight where he was overrated because he had heart.

Plus wasn't he on a steroid scandal list as well? Don't you think that could of made him Commander Evander?

Steroids do not teach you how to box.

Thats no excuse though If It's true. It would help his aggression which would help his heart and conditioning In the ring helping him win. His reflexes and strength would be better as well.

He always lost to the best Heavies though In his prime. His best assets where his head movement, footwork and speed.

Tyson's mentality wasn't the same by the time he fought Holy, Physically he was In his prime but he didn't seem to be there mentally.

I don't want a fight collection of stubborn recycled Americans who might be possible cheaters.

Toney barely ever trains, he only sparred mostly and did bagwork and ate like a pig. Holy's always In shape training.

Tyson wasn't the same when he had a bunch of yesmen and when DK took him over.

I only ever watch his 80's fights, not going near his later junk.

He was great, and has been in some of the best fights ever, but he obviously struggled in the era of bigger heavyweights (though struggling against limitations is a big part of greatness) & he is tained by avoiding Lewis for a long time before getting twice outboxed and being found on a steroid list. Ferocious fighter who at his best didn't always display the best tactical sense (trading with Bowe 1 for instance...).

Max Molyneux wrote:
Holy was always overrated anyway because of his heart. All he had was good speed and headmovement In his prime.

You have let yourself down badly with this post Max - your knowldege and understanding of boxing is waay more limited then I originally thought.

Take a look at Holyfied v Dwight Muhammad Qawi I or v Michael Dokes up at heavy or v Bowe I and II or against Tyson and/or Lewis.

The man is a legend and he has never been done for steriods. He is a small heavy who competed on even terms in an era of giants. You can't do that on heart alone..

TerribleTerry wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote:
Holy was always overrated anyway because of his heart. All he had was good speed and headmovement In his prime.

You have let yourself down badly with this post Max - your knowldege and understanding of boxing is waay more limited then I originally thought.

Take a look at Holyfied v Dwight Muhammad Qawi I or v Michael Dokes up at heavy or v Bowe I and II or against Tyson and/or Lewis.

The man is a legend and he has never been done for steriods. He is a small heavy who competed on even terms in an era of giants. You can't do that on heart alone..

Never think someone Is limited when you don't even know them just because they share a different opinion to you. That will make you limited and a hypocrite.

I was talking about Heavyweight Holy, not Cruiser.

As for his Roids case, he's been linked to one scandal. If It's true than what I said about him overrated at Heavyweight Is even more warranted.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=2782741

He's stubborn and thinks god wants him to keep fighting, shouldn't this affect his legacy?

No It's opinion although because I mentioned the word American It appears that way. There Is no predudice In my posts. I always talk from opinion.

I have watched Holy fights. That Is a gibberish assumption. Some of the stuff you come out with when talking about Manchester fighters has been gibberish at times.

He was world class, he won titles but I don't have to think he was superman. He's tarnished his own legacy.

Tyson was on a comeback trail after prison and beat on Bruno then a journeymen not coming to win. The public was fooled too much when It came to Tyson.

Max Molyneux wrote:
He's stubborn and thinks god wants him to keep fighting, shouldn't this affect his legacy?

Holyfield dispite fighting on is a legendary Heavyweight Boxer and history already see's him like this. Fighting on won't affect his legacy, he has already made it in history. Even when he lost in the first Bowe fight it is one of the greatest Heavyweight fights ever and it takes a great champion to come back and win the fights he did after this.

I think if it was put to a poll on how great Evander was as a Heavyweight you would see him rank very highly.

Was Ali for example not as great because he fought too long against Holmes and Berbick, no. He's a great for the fights before this that made him great, just as Evander is.

Thats fine If you guys rank Holy highly, I think he was good but not the legend most see him as. He lost to the biggest and best Heavyweight and was only lineal when he beat Douglas.

Lewis was linear even when Holy was WBA and IBF champ.

Terry D wrote:

TerribleTerry wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote:
Holy was always overrated anyway because of his heart. All he had was good speed and headmovement In his prime.

You have let yourself down badly with this post Max - your knowldege and understanding of boxing is waay more limited then I originally thought.

Take a look at Holyfied v Dwight Muhammad Qawi I or v Michael Dokes up at heavy or v Bowe I and II or against Tyson and/or Lewis.

The man is a legend and he has never been done for steriods. He is a small heavy who competed on even terms in an era of giants. You can't do that on heart alone..

Holyfield-Dokes was a sublime fight. A rare fight featuring the best of both men. Dokes looked rock hard in this fight.

Terry,
What a great fight Holyfield Dokes is to watch, serious fight, fast paced and heavy bombs threw by both men. Having a few beers last weekend a a couple of mates asked me to put on a good Heavyweight fight and this came to mind. What a great watch it was again!

Terry D wrote:

The Hawk wrote:

Terry D wrote: Holyfield-Dokes was a sublime fight. A rare fight featuring the best of both men. Dokes looked rock hard in this fight.

Terry,
What a great fight Holyfield Dokes is to watch, serious fight, fast paced and heavy bombs threw by both men. Having a few beers last weekend a a couple of mates asked me to put on a good Heavyweight fight and this came to mind. What a great watch it was again!

I showed it to my girlfriend recently, the fight that is, and she was enthralled by it.

I need to email you as my fight DVD frenzy might kick in as soon as my cash-flow does

It's a great fight to watch indeed Terry! Its a classic showing for anyone who has never seen an early Heavyweight Evander like my mates, we followed it up by Morrsion vs Mercer, good bit of old Heavyweight watching!

Look forward to hearing from mate, hope all's been going well!

Terry D wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote:No It's opinion although because I mentioned the word American It appears that way. There Is no predudice In my posts. I always talk from opinion.

I have watched Holy fights. That Is a gibberish assumption. Some of the stuff you come out with when talking about Manchester fighters has been gibberish at times.

He was world class, he won titles but I don't have to think he was superman. He's tarnished his own legacy.

Tyson was on a comeback trail after prison and beat on Bruno then a journeymen not coming to win. The public was fooled too much when It came to Tyson.

Believe me if what you write is gibberish, by your own admission, I do not replicate it in any way or on any subject whatsoever.

You admit that you did not watch some of his greatest fights and are therefore unable to understand that he would have beaten any Tyson that ever lived.

You often talk disparingly about America, American fighters and even American venues/fight towns so if you include the words "recycled Americans" we can assume that you have got the blinkers on yet again.

The public were not just fooled by a comebacking Tyson, he fooled them full-stop from the get-go.

As for my gibberish. I guess this is where you tell us Andy Morris has poor footwork? On the basis of two fights you have seen as opposed to the many rounds he has produced where his footwork is excellent.

You are not qualified to make judgements about Holyfield in my opinion and every successive posts proves this.

Aye and the same about your own gibberish. Not just Morris the gibberish about Hatton here as well but thats not just you.

Yes I talk about American fighters and not liking the matchups most are staying up late for, I liked the Diaz matchup though and going to watch that later. I just find that alot of them get too overrated a little because of names and hype. I liked the guy who beat Cook and Cory Spinks, but I just don't buy Into the hype alot of them get and some of them have turned out to be cheaters.

Most of them are horribly recycled as PPV stars as well and there best at the moment Is Floyd Mayweather, they got some prospects but for big names only Floyd Is worthy at the moment. The other worthy ones are the latin fighters like the Marquez brothers for example.

No one on here can call me blinkered after some of the stuff they come out with about Hatton. I can say the same back then safely then. People call me blinkered yet I hardly disagree with them most of the and they end up misunderstanding my posts.

They shouldn't of been fooled by Tyson's so called Bad man for the cameras antics. He fooled them even when he fought Lewis.

Since I have seen Holy fight I am qualifed to make judgements.

Max Molyneux wrote:Thats fine If you guys rank Holy highly, I think he was good but not the legend most see him as. He lost to the biggest and best Heavyweight and was only lineal when he beat Douglas.

Lewis was linear even when Holy was WBA and IBF champ.

Holyfield had patchy form at heavyweight, but on his night he was an awesome heavyweight.

Whilst many say Tyson was shot when Holy beat him, only a really good heavyweight on top form was capable of beating him that night. Tyson was the better heavyweight for my money on best form, but his best form didn't last long enough, whereas Holyfield was a top flight heavyweight for a whole decade, despite being dwarfed by most of the big names he fought. Lewis was in his prime wheras Holyfield was just past his when they fought, and seeing how close both those fights were, I'm willing to opine that Holyfield would have prevailed had he been a year or two younger.

Even his fights with Ruiz in retrospect don't look so bad, all close ones, even with Holyfield well past it by that point.

One of the toughest men ever in the division, only stopped once in his prime, by a huge hitting Riddick Bowe, and even arguably that wasn't his prime.

Terry D wrote:

The Hawk wrote:

Terry D wrote: I showed it to my girlfriend recently, the fight that is, and she was enthralled by it.

I need to email you as my fight DVD frenzy might kick in as soon as my cash-flow does

It's a great fight to watch indeed Terry! Its a classic showing for anyone who has never seen an early Heavyweight Evander like my mates, we followed it up by Morrsion vs Mercer, good bit of old Heavyweight watching!

Look forward to hearing from mate, hope all's been going well!

I got a good DVD copy of Evander-Dokes to replace my video one

Not been doing too bad. Still shit with the old emails. Looking forward to putting a few DVDs together and replacing the VHS. Glad to hear your mates are seeing the best fights.

They are far better to have on disc, the old VHS takes up mountains of space, drive you fecking mad for space

I make sure I show my mates some classics, you have to make sure they see fights that make Boxing so great!

Hatton's criticism was fair though, he was stalling and then Floyd pretended to retire. People here were doubting that Calzaghe was going to fight Kessler but didn't think nothing of Hatton stalling and thought he will fight Floyd. At least both are happening now but Hatton was getting away with the staling when Calzaghe fairly wasn't, theirs a bad double standard on here sometimes. His excuses are always believed too, whats the problem with putting 7lbs on In 5 weeks? Plus he could of taken less water weight off surely? Then there was claims of a chest Infection against Urango.

I said I like Spinks, I didn't say he was better than Holy. You mentioned my talk about American fighters, so I mentioned that I do like some. They just get too much respect and think the boxing world revolves around them which I think Is true. Spinks boxes smart, thats what I like. I liked the way Holy used to box too but he has tarnished himself. Spinks legacy Is no where near as good so I don't disagree Holy was better.

Yes some US stars are brought back for PPV but guys like Jones, Holyfield and Hopkins, though faded, are trading on hard-fought reputations in the ring. Of the three no one deserves the accolades than more Holyfield who was the supreme Cruiserweight and, in my personal opinion, one of the outstanding fighters of the 1990s, in any division.

They havent shown they can still be brilliant fighters any more so they shouldn't be on big time ppv shows, but they can still sell so thats not there not but the publics I guess for buying Into It.

Holy's old determination and skill was outstanding I'll agree with that. By logic I have watched Holy fights so I can judge him.

As for USA stars fighting at 3am. I don't give a shit, Taylor-Pavlik was worth the late night.

Taylor lost to Spinks and was getting the decisions he shouldn't of been getting and Pavlik won't last long, his skills are horrible, but he has power and strength.

Holyfield in his pomp and in full flow was a thing of beauty. Absolutely wonderful to watch. Often times he was the much smaller man but his range of skills combined with so much heart and determination graced the HW division. He's a legend in my book.

Max, download this fight, watch it and then come back and give your thoughts on Holyfield.

From March, 11th, 1989-From Caesars Palace, Las Vegas

Evander Holyfield vs. Michael Dokes

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7LMZGZCJ

http://www.megarotic.com/?d=7BBL6C10

HJsplit to join files.

Credit to ghoster for the upload over at the excellent RSR

Max Molyneux wrote:Hatton's criticism was fair though, he was stalling and then Floyd pretended to retire. People here were doubting that Calzaghe was going to fight Kessler but didn't think nothing of Hatton stalling and thought he will fight Floyd. At least both are happening now but Hatton was getting away with the staling when Calzaghe fairly wasn't, theirs a bad double standard on here sometimes. His excuses are always believed too, whats the problem with putting 7lbs on In 5 weeks? Plus he could of taken less water weight off surely? Then there was claims of a chest Infection against Urango.

I said I like Spinks, I didn't say he was better than Holy. You mentioned my talk about American fighters, so I mentioned that I do like some. They just get too much respect and think the boxing world revolves around them which I think Is true. Spinks boxes smart, thats what I like. I liked the way Holy used to box too but he has tarnished himself. Spinks legacy Is no where near as good so I don't disagree Holy was better.

Yes some US stars are brought back for PPV but guys like Jones, Holyfield and Hopkins, though faded, are trading on hard-fought reputations in the ring. Of the three no one deserves the accolades than more Holyfield who was the supreme Cruiserweight and, in my personal opinion, one of the outstanding fighters of the 1990s, in any division.

They havent shown they can still be brilliant fighters any more so they shouldn't be on big time ppv shows, but they can still sell so thats not there not but the publics I guess for buying Into It.

Holy's old determination and skill was outstanding I'll agree with that. By logic I have watched Holy fights so I can judge him.

As for USA stars fighting at 3am. I don't give a shit, Taylor-Pavlik was worth the late night.

Taylor lost to Spinks and was getting the decisions he shouldn't of been getting and Pavlik won't last long, his skills are horrible, but he has power and strength.

please shut up if all you can do is praise Warren fightrers post 2000.

Terry D wrote:

TerribleTerry wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote:
Holy was always overrated anyway because of his heart. All he had was good speed and headmovement In his prime.

You have let yourself down badly with this post Max - your knowldege and understanding of boxing is waay more limited then I originally thought.

Take a look at Holyfied v Dwight Muhammad Qawi I or v Michael Dokes up at heavy or v Bowe I and II or against Tyson and/or Lewis.

The man is a legend and he has never been done for steriods. He is a small heavy who competed on even terms in an era of giants. You can't do that on heart alone..

Holyfield-Dokes was a sublime fight. A rare fight featuring the best of both men. Dokes looked rock hard in this fight.

for 2-way offensive technique at heavyweight there is little to rival Holy-Dokes. great fight & probably Evander's peak. (although his career up to the age of 36 or 37 was full of Azumah Nelson like peaks & troughs)

Autobarn wrote:

Max Molyneux wrote:Hatton's criticism was fair though, he was stalling and then Floyd pretended to retire. People here were doubting that Calzaghe was going to fight Kessler but didn't think nothing of Hatton stalling and thought he will fight Floyd. At least both are happening now but Hatton was getting away with the staling when Calzaghe fairly wasn't, theirs a bad double standard on here sometimes. His excuses are always believed too, whats the problem with putting 7lbs on In 5 weeks? Plus he could of taken less water weight off surely? Then there was claims of a chest Infection against Urango.

I said I like Spinks, I didn't say he was better than Holy. You mentioned my talk about American fighters, so I mentioned that I do like some. They just get too much respect and think the boxing world revolves around them which I think Is true. Spinks boxes smart, thats what I like. I liked the way Holy used to box too but he has tarnished himself. Spinks legacy Is no where near as good so I don't disagree Holy was better.

Yes some US stars are brought back for PPV but guys like Jones, Holyfield and Hopkins, though faded, are trading on hard-fought reputations in the ring. Of the three no one deserves the accolades than more Holyfield who was the supreme Cruiserweight and, in my personal opinion, one of the outstanding fighters of the 1990s, in any division.

They havent shown they can still be brilliant fighters any more so they shouldn't be on big time ppv shows, but they can still sell so thats not there not but the publics I guess for buying Into It.

Holy's old determination and skill was outstanding I'll agree with that. By logic I have watched Holy fights so I can judge him.

As for USA stars fighting at 3am. I don't give a shit, Taylor-Pavlik was worth the late night.

Taylor lost to Spinks and was getting the decisions he shouldn't of been getting and Pavlik won't last long, his skills are horrible, but he has power and strength.

please shut up if all you can do is praise Warren fightrers post 2000.

Prove I have praised allegedly fighters or I can say the same when you bring up your double standards.

That was a total serpent seed post.

Can you please stop being retarded. You are oversensitive too.

if this is all you can offer, clear off & stop polluting this thread, LOL