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

[margaret thatcher]

I had briedis up 3-1 vs Usyk, then Usyk winning pretty much everything from 5-11. MB couldnt keep up with him. usyk was then coming on strong and chasing after briedis in the first minute of round 12, but briedis catches an over eager usyk with a good right hand to turn the tide, then he puts it on usyk, and clearly wins the last. pretty sure i had it 116-112 usyk

i thought it was a clear usyk win and that the official cards were a bit too close, but cant really complain much about 115-113 when im just a round off. watching it live, on round by rounds, and following other cards on websites/social media....there was little doubt usyk should have won. and at least he did get the decision he deserved

usyk as usual found the way to win, in his opponents backyard. travelled the world beating top 10 opponents, other champs, wracking up 7 title wins, 6 defenses, 2 unifications, and an undisputed reign. meanwhile, alp prefers toney beating 1 top 10 opponent at cruiser, then decides that depth is now going to be his big thing when ranking usyk as a hw

[giacomino]

I had briedis up 3-1 vs Usyk, then Usyk winning pretty much everything from 5-11. MB couldnt keep up with him. usyk was then coming on strong and chasing after briedis in the first minute of round 12, but briedis catches an over eager usyk with a good right hand to turn the tide, then he puts it on usyk, and clearly wins the last. pretty sure i had it 116-112 usyk

i thought it was a clear usyk win and that the official cards were a bit too close, but cant really complain much about 115-113 when im just a round off. watching it live, on round by rounds, and following other cards on websites/social media....there was little doubt usyk should have won. and at least he did get the decision he deserved

usyk as usual found the way to win, in his opponents backyard. travelled the world beating top 10 opponents, other champs, wracking up 7 title wins, 6 defenses, 2 unifications, and an undisputed reign. meanwhile, alp prefers toney beating 1 top 10 opponent at cruiser, then decides that depth is now going to be his big thing when ranking usyk as a hw

Yeah he had a great run at cruiserweight. I think 115-113 was fair. I am old enough to remember the first cruiserweight title fight (the Camel-Parlov “draw) and IMO Holyfield is the only cruiserweight you can compare with Usyk and who I’d pick to beat him. Not Toney

[margaret thatcher]

not toney indeed

[Ambling Alp II]

I'm sure some of the guys Usyk beat at cruiserweight could beat 90s contenders like Mercer or Bruno. The weight increase and early weight ins mean that some cruiserweights are as big as 90s heavyweights.
In one recent bout a cruiserweight entered the ring reportedly over 220 pounds.

As far Holyfield given he lost to Moorer you would have to give Joshua, Breidis, Hunter a good shot at beating him realistically

I'm sure that would have almost for have lost. Mercer occasionally was off but that would be their only chance. I know that weight is more important to than how good someone is. and how good someone is depends largely if you had been following the sport when they fought or if they were before your time.
Holyfield was past his best when he lost to Moorer. not way past it but past it. He did not fight well that particular night. At his best, he would have beaten Joshua, Bredis, and Hunter easily. But I know, you like to cherry pick and go after a fighter's worst performance if you don't like him.

[Cojimar 1946]

Immediately prior to Holyfield Mercer had a draw with Marion Wilson that most people had him losing. Before that he had a rematch with Ferguson that was close despite showing up lighter than he was against Holyfield. Obviously prior to that you have the losses to Ferguson and Holmes. At a certain point you have to stop making excuses and admit maybe he wasn't that good. You don't give Fury excuses for all his bad performance so why so many for Mercer?

Id have to favor Hunter and Breidis here. Better skills better stamina more consistent. They would also have to be favored over Foreman due to greater speed and mobility. Foreman would only have a punchers chance here but that seems unlikely as neither has been stopped.

[Ambling Alp II]

Mercer was very inconsistent. Everybody knows that. Yes, he looked terrible in some fights.

He also looked very good in some fights. Beat some quality opponents. He beat Morrison. Beat Damiani. Beat Witherspoon.

Easily could have got the decision against Lennox Lewis. Her fought well and it was a very good fight.
Have you watched any of these fights?

Most importantly, Mercer fought well against Holyfield. It was a very good fight. It took a very good fighter to beat that Mercer. Holyfield did it.

[gilgamesh]

Mercer looked like sh*t in the Damiani fight and was lucky that Damiani had no heart and just gave up after getting his nose broken. The knockout even looks like shit. You barely see the punch land, but it obviously must've caught the tip of Damiani's nose.

Damiani was winning almost every round til then.

I thought he lost to Lewis, but it was a 96-94 score and he certainly gave Lewis all he could handle. Holyfield won a bit more clearly than Lewis did, I think he dropped Mercer at one point.

[Cojimar 1946]

I wouldn't rate Damiani or Morrison in the eras top 30 and the Witherspoon fight is widely considered a robbery that Mercer not only lost but by a wider margin than he did to Lewis and Holyfield. Mercer's a perfect example of a guy who seems to be overrated simply based on the time period he fought in. If he didn't beat anyone in the eras top 30 (which he likely didn't if you don't count the Witherspoon robbery) he can't be said to have done much in his era regardless of how great it was.

Holyfield's resume is a lot less impressive when you look at the condition of his opponents. Many were past prime or badly out of shape. Douglas and Bowe (fight 2) both were badly out of shape. Douglas just showed up for the paycheck basically. Foreman and Holmes were both old. Moorer was out of shape for the rematch. Tyson was in okay shape but skill wise seems to have regressed from his 80s form.

[gilgamesh]

I wouldn't rate Damiani or Morrison in the eras top 30 and the Witherspoon fight is widely considered a robbery that Mercer not only lost but by a wider margin than he did to Lewis and Holyfield. Mercer's a perfect example of a guy who seems to be overrated simply based on the time period he fought in. If he didn't beat anyone in the eras top 30 (which he likely didn't if you don't count the Witherspoon robbery) he can't be said to have done much in his era regardless of how great it was.

Holyfield's resume is a lot less impressive when you look at the condition of his opponents. Many were past prime or badly out of shape. Douglas and Bowe (fight 2) both were badly out of shape. Douglas just showed up for the paycheck basically. Foreman and Holmes were both old. Moorer was out of shape for the rematch. Tyson was in okay shape but skill wise seems to have regressed from his 80s form.

I don't know dude. You say that, but can you actually name 30 dudes in the 90's better than Morrison?

Morrison did beat Foreman right before Foreman won the Heavyweight title at age 45.

Michael Moorer accomplished more than Tommy Morrison, but he didn't beat Foreman.

[Ambling Alp II]

Morrison certainly was one of the top 30 heavyweights when Mercer beat him. Which is of course what counts. Borderline top 10.

As for the Damiani fight, Mercer struggled. Damiani was fighting a good fight, to his credit. But Mercer to credit came back and won. foreman was losing convincingly to Moorer. Doesn't matter.

As for the Mercer-Lewis fight, will have to agree to disagree. I thought Mercer won that fight. Nobody talks about it anymore, but a lot of people at the time thought Mercer won as well. It was a great fight and for whatever reason is lost in history.

Holyfield did clearly beat Mercer, but it was a competitive fight. Very good fight.

Mercer also looked good in fights against lesser fighters. Certainly, true that in some fights he looked lethargic. However, overall, he was a very good fighter. He was a top 10 (sometimes top 5) heavyweight for several years when the division was pretty good.

[gilgamesh]

Morrison certainly was one of the top 30 heavyweights when Mercer beat him. Which is of course what counts. Borderline top 10.

As for the Damiani fight, Mercer struggled. Damiani was fighting a good fight, to his credit. But Mercer to credit came back and won. foreman was losing convincingly to Moorer. Doesn't matter.

As for the Mercer-Lewis fight, will have to agree to disagree. I thought Mercer won that fight. Nobody talks about it anymore, but a lot of people at the time thought Mercer won as well. It was a great fight and for whatever reason is lost in history.

Holyfield did clearly beat Mercer, but it was a competitive fight. Very good fight.

Mercer also looked good in fights against lesser fighters. Certainly, true that in some fights he looked lethargic. However, overall, he was a very good fighter. He was a top 10 (sometimes top 5) heavyweight for several years when the division was pretty good.

I think quite a few people hold the Mercer vs Lewis fight in high regard still. It's one of the more entertaining fights either of em ever fought and one of Mercer's best efforts even in defeat.

I had it 96-94 Lewis. 96-94 Mercer or 95-95 certainly wouldn't be outrageous there, but I think the right man won. That was definitely Mercer fighting as well as he possibly could.

[EdwardRevolver1993]

I haven't seen and scored Lewis-Mercer in quite some time. Now, after an interesting chat over here, I'm tempted to revisit this fight.

If anyone else would want to score it round-by-round, I'd be happy to discuss the fight.

[Cojimar 1946]

I don't see much argument for old Holmes and Mercer being better than Joshua, Fury etc let alone someone like Bert Cooper who dropped Holyfield or Moorer who beat him. You say Holyfield was past prime but he was younger than Usyk was against Joshua and Fury (31 vs 34/35 and 37)

If you are going to make a big deal about Usyk dropping rounds to these guys how on earth can we absolve Holyfield for dropping rounds to a guy most feel lost to Marion Wilson. and Ferguson. Wilson and Ferguson are worse than Andy Ruiz surely. Moreover how do you explain away a loss to Moorer at 31?

Id put the following 90s heavyweights ahead of Morrison if we take the best 90s version
Lewis
Holyfield
Tyson
Tubbs
Witherspoon
Norris
Tucker
Hunter
Bruno
Ruddock
Zolkin
Mercer
McCall
Sanders
Bowe
Moorer
Donald
Vitali Klitschko
Rahman
Tua
Ruiz
Byrd
Ibeabuchi
Kirk Johnson
Briggs
Grant
Golota

That's 27 by my count but I would argue Hide, Barrett, Maskaev all have an argument for being better than Morrison. Probably the 90s version of Wlad also beats him despite being pre prime. You could maybe argue top 30 but id say he's clearly not top 25 and has no case whatsoever for top 20

[gilgamesh]

Lots of those guys aren't really any better than Morrison. At least not definitively.

[Cojimar 1946]

One can make a reasonable argument for all of them rating above him.

Moreover there are guys I didn't list who could be argued as well. Like Purrity, Seldon, etc

[gilgamesh]

You could just as easily argue he's better than a Kirk Johnson, Michael Grant type.

Or no worse anyhow. Not like those guys have any marquee wins really. We'll never know for sure because we never saw all these matches, but Tommy's record is as good as there's really

[GordonChen]

How Long Would Dubois would last against Holyfield & Lewis if he took both bouts?

[gilgamesh]

How Long Would Dubois would last against Holyfield & Lewis if he took both bouts?

I could see Lewis dispatching him early. Like in 1 or 2.

A Holyfield/Dubois fight might play out similarly to the Usyk/Dubois rematch.

[goose 5]

Guys, this is a great thread. Very, very interesting and well-argued.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Lennox would beat daniel d pretty easily. Daniel couldnt stop his jab he isnt good enough

Holyfield hed probably be stopped later like usyk stopped him

[Ambling Alp II]

Lots of those guys aren't really any better than Morrison. At least not definitively.

It is just stupid going off a list like this.

First, he is better than some of these guys. Only a few like Lewis, Holyfield , Bowe and Tyson were a lot better.

Were there 30 guys better than Morrison when Morrison fought Mercer? Of course not. Which is what really matters. not some list of guys who fought in the same decade.

Usyk has not fought anywhere near the competition that Holyfield. Holyfield also was not just fighting once a year. to this day, He has not taken anywhere near the wear and tear that Holyfield did. To this day, the guy has a grand total of 24 fights!
8 at heavyweight. A whopping 8.
He is a good fighter. He ain't no Evander Holyfield.

[Cojimar 1946]

I think Morrison is around the same level as Ross Purrity. He was a solid gatekeeper/journeyman who was never among the top 10 realistically but top 15/20 for much of his career. Beating him is roughly equivalent to Vitali over Purrity and Hide for which he receives little credit.

[gilgamesh]

Lots of those guys aren't really any better than Morrison. At least not definitively.

It is just stupid going off a list like this.

First, he is better than some of these guys. Only a few like Lewis, Holyfield , Bowe and Tyson were a lot better.

Were there 30 guys better than Morrison when Morrison fought Mercer? Of course not. Which is what really matters. not some list of guys who fought in the same decade.

Usyk has not fought anywhere near the competition that Holyfield. Holyfield also was not just fighting once a year. to this day, He has not taken anywhere near the wear and tear that Holyfield did. To this day, the guy has a grand total of 24 fights!
8 at heavyweight. A whopping 8.
He is a good fighter. He ain't no Evander Holyfield.

He did have twice as many Amateur fights as Evander Holyfield. That's just something that comes with the parts of the World they grew up in. In America if you've got a World Class amateur you're gonna push him into the Pro game. In Ukraine or any of those other Eastern European countries, they'd let you be an Amateur for as long as you want to, and also give you financial incentive to want to keep doing it.

As of this moment Holyfield has almost twice as many World Championship fights as a Professional than Usyk has, and he has 3 more Championship wins than Usyk.

[Ambling Alp II]

it is funny how we can spink stats. We can ignore that Usyk has a ridiculously low amount of fights in his career. Which of course makes it much easier to be undefeated and fight at an older age because he has taken so little punishment.

Anyway, the sheer amount of title fights or title fights win doesn't mean much at all.
Usyk gets credit for a title fight when he fights somebody like Dubois. Holyfield-Bowe III was not even a title fight! Neither was the Mercer fight. Both of those were much more important fights in boxing history than Usyk-DuBois.

Mercer-Lewis was not a title fight. Ali-Frazier II was not a title fight. You could go on and on with this. Quality always trumps quantity.

[gilgamesh]

it is funny how we can spink stats. We can ignore that Usyk has a ridiculously low amount of fights in his career. Which of course makes it much easier to be undefeated and fight at an older age because he has taken so little punishment.

Anyway, the sheer amount of title fights or title fights win doesn't mean much at all.
Usyk gets credit for a title fight when he fights somebody like Dubois. Holyfield-Bowe III was not even a title fight! Neither was the Mercer fight. Both of those were much more important fights in boxing history than Usyk-DuBois.

Mercer-Lewis was not a title fight. Ali-Frazier II was not a title fight. You could go on and on with this. Quality always trumps quantity.

There's definitely lots of major Non Title Fights throughout history that outshine certain title bouts in terms of action, and in terms of quality of the combatants involved.

I'm pretty sure nobody has really made the argument that Usyk has as many big fights or big wins as Holyfield, but when you look at them both in the ring. The way they operate. It's clear to see Usyk would've been a tough night for Holyfield.

Usyk is most definitely every bit the problem that Michael Moorer would've been, and I suspect he's more of a problem than Moorer.

I'm pretty sure my pick in this thread was that Holyfield would probably win a close decision right? So why has this gone on for pages and pages? You're offended by the idea that it would be competitive?