BoxRec

It was Mike Tyson hands down. A no brainer. Had he not gotten thrown in the pen he would have regained the title. Lennox Lewis stunk.....

Ambling Alp wrote: Bowe never lost to to anyone except for the close decision loss to Holyfield.

Bowe never fought anyone except for Holyfield.

Why does Bowe get criticized for "not beating anyone but Holyfield"
Bowe easily beat several decent fighters such as Biggs, Donald, Hide, Coetzer and Seldon.
He beat Holyfield who was certainly better than than anyone Tyson ever beat.
There is no reason to think that Bowe would have lost to anyone that Tyson ever beat.

Decagon wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Wow. You seriously think Lewis did more more damage than Mercer in that fight? Mercer defintely won rounds convincingly than Lewis did.

Sure. Look at the uppercuts he landed in that fight, and the combos. Almost any other heavyweight in the division would've been knocked out.

Mercer landed an awful lot of hard clean shots himself.
I guess we will have to disagree on this one.

Bowe fought so few top level opponnents that I would not be surprised if some of Tyson's victims such as Ruddock could beat him. Bowe did not prove himself against the best in the division. He avoided all the big punchers at heavyweight. Bowe was also thrashed twice by Andrew Golota whom Lewis destroyed in one round.

Herbie Hide, Jorge Luis Gonzalez and Bowe's other victims outside of Holyfield cannot compare to many of Tyson's best wins such as Tucker, Ruddock, Berbick, Bruno, etc. There is no case at all for putting Bowe near Tyson.

Cojimar 1945 wrote:Bowe fought so few top level opponnents that I would not be surprised if some of Tyson's victims such as Ruddock could beat him. Bowe did not prove himself against the best in the division. He avoided all the big punchers at heavyweight. Bowe was also thrashed twice by Andrew Golota whom Lewis destroyed in one round.

Herbie Hide, Jorge Luis Gonzalez and Bowe's other victims outside of Holyfield cannot compare to many of Tyson's best wins such as Tucker, Ruddock, Berbick, Bruno, etc. There is no case at all for putting Bowe near Tyson.

I couldn’t agree more. While I think Bowe was probably better than anyone that Tyson beat, I also think that had Bowe fought the level of fighters that Tyson fought he would have lost to a few of them. One of the marks of a truly great fighter is the ability to win fights over good fighters even when you’re not at your best, and Bowe never showed that ability because he fought so few good fighters.

Hide, Coetzer, Seldon and Donald were never among the 4 best heavyweights active. In fact they may never have been among the 5 best active heavyweights and so on. By contrast Tyson beat a number of heavyweights rated higher than these guys.

Decagon wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Why does Bowe get criticized for "not beating anyone but Holyfield"
Bowe easily beat several decent fighters such as Biggs, Donald, Hide, Coetzer and Seldon.
He beat Holyfield who was certainly better than than anyone Tyson ever beat.
There is no reason to think that Bowe would have lost to anyone that Tyson ever beat.

Seldon's the best name on that list, and look at the way that fight played itself out. It was one of the most obvious dives I've ever seen.

Was it even better than Seldons dive against Tyson?
Seldon should have been an olympic pool diver not a boxer

The Great John L wrote:

Cojimar 1945 wrote:Bowe fought so few top level opponnents that I would not be surprised if some of Tyson's victims such as Ruddock could beat him. Bowe did not prove himself against the best in the division. He avoided all the big punchers at heavyweight. Bowe was also thrashed twice by Andrew Golota whom Lewis destroyed in one round.


Herbie Hide, Jorge Luis Gonzalez and Bowe's other victims outside of Holyfield cannot compare to many of Tyson's best wins such as Tucker, Ruddock, Berbick, Bruno, etc. There is no case at all for putting Bowe near Tyson.

I couldn’t agree more. While I think Bowe was probably better than anyone that Tyson beat, I also think that had Bowe fought the level of fighters that Tyson fought he would have lost to a few of them. One of the marks of a truly great fighter is the ability to win fights over good fighters even when you’re not at your best, and Bowe never showed that ability because he fought so few good fighters.

Bowe nver proved himself against the best of the division? Ever heard of Evander Holyfield?

No case for ranking Bowe near Tyson. Yes there is a case. A strong case.
Golota isn't a very reliable yardstick to compare fighters. He is about as inconsistent fighters as there is. Sometimes he performed well and sometimes he was awful. Just becasue Lewis destroyed him doesn't mean much. And the bottom line is that although Bowe was at his worst against Golota, he still won against Golota.

Bowe beat a fighter that was far superior to anyone that Tyson ever beat. He beat Holyfield when Holyfield was a t his best. Tyson couldn't even beat a past his prime Holyfield.
Unlike Tyson, Bowe never got knocked out.
Unlike Tyson, Bowe never quit.

Bowe would have lost to a few of the guys that Tyson beat? Like who? He was far better to anyone Tyson ever beat.

Bowe did beat good fighters when he wasn't at his best.
He was far below his best when he beat Golota. Yes, he was lucky that Golota was ultimately disqualified. However, Bowe could have quit earlier in both of their fights but he hung in there and won both times when Golota was finally disqualified.

If Tyson was in Bowe's situation he would have rolled over and lost, like he always did when things got tough.

Bowe was in serious trouble in the 3rd fight with Holyfield but managed to survive and came back to knockout Holyfield.
When did Tyson ever get up from a knockdown and come back to win?

The first Holyfield-Bowe fight was a very tough fight and Bowe managed to win.
When did Tyson ever win a fight when things got tough?

Decagon wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Why does Bowe get criticized for "not beating anyone but Holyfield"
Bowe easily beat several decent fighters such as Biggs, Donald, Hide, Coetzer and Seldon.
He beat Holyfield who was certainly better than than anyone Tyson ever beat.
There is no reason to think that Bowe would have lost to anyone that Tyson ever beat.

Seldon's the best name on that list, and look at the way that fight played itself out. It was one of the most obvious dives I've ever seen.

Donald was a pretty skilled boxer and Bowe beat him fairly easily. Coetzer was ranked pretty high when Bowe beat him. Biggs was the top contender for a period during Tyson's reign.

Obviously none of these guys were great. However they were decent and Bowe beat them all easily.
Tysons' best victims, Bruno, Ruddock, Thomas , all of the other alphabet soup boys weren't any closer to the Evander Holyfield level than were to the Biggs, Coetzer, Seldon, Donald level.

Ambling Alp wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

Cojimar 1945 wrote:Bowe fought so few top level opponnents that I would not be surprised if some of Tyson's victims such as Ruddock could beat him. Bowe did not prove himself against the best in the division. He avoided all the big punchers at heavyweight. Bowe was also thrashed twice by Andrew Golota whom Lewis destroyed in one round.


Herbie Hide, Jorge Luis Gonzalez and Bowe's other victims outside of Holyfield cannot compare to many of Tyson's best wins such as Tucker, Ruddock, Berbick, Bruno, etc. There is no case at all for putting Bowe near Tyson.

I couldn’t agree more. While I think Bowe was probably better than anyone that Tyson beat, I also think that had Bowe fought the level of fighters that Tyson fought he would have lost to a few of them. One of the marks of a truly great fighter is the ability to win fights over good fighters even when you’re not at your best, and Bowe never showed that ability because he fought so few good fighters.

Bowe nver proved himself against the best of the division? Ever heard of Evander Holyfield?

No case for ranking Bowe near Tyson. Yes there is a case. A strong case.
Golota isn't a very reliable yardstick to compare fighters. He is about as inconsistent fighters as there is. Sometimes he performed well and sometimes he was awful. Just becasue Lewis destroyed him doesn't mean much. And the bottom line is that although Bowe was at his worst against Golota, he still won against Golota.

Bowe beat a fighter that was far superior to anyone that Tyson ever beat. He beat Holyfield when Holyfield was a t his best. Tyson couldn't even beat a past his prime Holyfield.
Unlike Tyson, Bowe never got knocked out.
Unlike Tyson, Bowe never quit.

Bowe would have lost to a few of the guys that Tyson beat? Like who? He was far better to anyone Tyson ever beat.

Bowe did beat good fighters when he wasn't at his best.
He was far below his best when he beat Golota. Yes, he was lucky that Golota was ultimately disqualified. However, Bowe could have quit earlier in both of their fights but he hung in there and won both times when Golota was finally disqualified.

If Tyson was in Bowe's situation he would have rolled over and lost, like he always did when things got tough.

Bowe was in serious trouble in the 3rd fight with Holyfield but managed to survive and came back to knockout Holyfield.
When did Tyson ever get up from a knockdown and come back to win?

The first Holyfield-Bowe fight was a very tough fight and Bowe managed to win.
When did Tyson ever win a fight when things got tough?

I think you completely missed the point of my post. Yes, Holyfield is better than anyone that Tyson beat. I even said that in my post!! And no, I don’t think anyone that Tyson beat was better than Bowe, but being a great fighter means that you win against world class competition in many fights and Bowe did not do that. Not even close.

You asked who Tyson beat that could have beaten Bowe? I don’t know because Bowe avoided just about anybody that had a chance to beat him, except Holyfield. And he fought Holyfield because Holyfield was the big dog that he was built up to challenge so that he and his management could get the really big money. There’s nothing wrong with that, because that’s how almost all HWs are managed these days, but it didn’t take much to get him the title fight, and then besides Holyfield he was pretty much in hiding.

If Bowe had fought the level of fighter that Tyson fought between the Berbick and Ruddock fights, he would have lost some fights. Were any of those guys better than Bowe? Probably not; but we’ll never know because besides the big paydays against Holyfield, Bowe’s management avoided any real challenges for their meal ticket. Besides Holyfield, Bowe’s next best victory was probably over Larry Donald. That’s pretty sad. You can list some better names like Thomas, Tubbs and Dokes, but they were all well past their primes, and Bowe had a very tough time against Tubbs. What did Tyson do against a younger Tubbs 3 years earlier? Of course, that’s not really a fair question, but if all you want to do is look at Bowe’s performances against Holyfield and compare them to the post prison Tyson performances against Holyfield, then it seems like a pretty fair question.

Bowe was a very good fighter, but please try to be a little objective. His wins over Holyfield were very impressive, but there wasn’t anything else in his career. He was very protected, and simply didn’t have the resume. He certainly had the size and skills to beat Tyson, but he didn’t have any where near the ring accomplishments of Tyson.

Ambling Alp wrote:Donald was a pretty skilled boxer and Bowe beat him fairly easily. Coetzer was ranked pretty high when Bowe beat him. Biggs was the top contender for a period during Tyson's reign.

Yes, Biggs was a top contender during Tyson’s reign. However, he wasn’t anything when Bowe fought him.

Ambling Alp wrote:Obviously none of these guys were great. However they were decent and Bowe beat them all easily.
Tysons' best victims, Bruno, Ruddock, Thomas , all of the other alphabet soup boys weren't any closer to the Evander Holyfield level than were to the Biggs, Coetzer, Seldon, Donald level.

Do you really think that Coetzer was comparable to Bruno, Smith, Ruddock, Tucker, Williams, Tubbs, Spinks, etc.!!??!!

I revise my earlier rating. My order now is:

1 Lewis
2 Tyson
3 Holyfield
4 Bowe

Prime Tyson was a force Holyfield never was.

The Great John L wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:

The Great John L wrote:
I couldn’t agree more. While I think Bowe was probably better than anyone that Tyson beat, I also think that had Bowe fought the level of fighters that Tyson fought he would have lost to a few of them. One of the marks of a truly great fighter is the ability to win fights over good fighters even when you’re not at your best, and Bowe never showed that ability because he fought so few good fighters.

Bowe nver proved himself against the best of the division? Ever heard of Evander Holyfield?

No case for ranking Bowe near Tyson. Yes there is a case. A strong case.
Golota isn't a very reliable yardstick to compare fighters. He is about as inconsistent fighters as there is. Sometimes he performed well and sometimes he was awful. Just becasue Lewis destroyed him doesn't mean much. And the bottom line is that although Bowe was at his worst against Golota, he still won against Golota.

Bowe beat a fighter that was far superior to anyone that Tyson ever beat. He beat Holyfield when Holyfield was a t his best. Tyson couldn't even beat a past his prime Holyfield.
Unlike Tyson, Bowe never got knocked out.
Unlike Tyson, Bowe never quit.

Bowe would have lost to a few of the guys that Tyson beat? Like who? He was far better to anyone Tyson ever beat.

Bowe did beat good fighters when he wasn't at his best.
He was far below his best when he beat Golota. Yes, he was lucky that Golota was ultimately disqualified. However, Bowe could have quit earlier in both of their fights but he hung in there and won both times when Golota was finally disqualified.

If Tyson was in Bowe's situation he would have rolled over and lost, like he always did when things got tough.

Bowe was in serious trouble in the 3rd fight with Holyfield but managed to survive and came back to knockout Holyfield.
When did Tyson ever get up from a knockdown and come back to win?

The first Holyfield-Bowe fight was a very tough fight and Bowe managed to win.
When did Tyson ever win a fight when things got tough?

I think you completely missed the point of my post. Yes, Holyfield is better than anyone that Tyson beat. I even said that in my post!! And no, I don’t think anyone that Tyson beat was better than Bowe, but being a great fighter means that you win against world class competition in many fights and Bowe did not do that. Not even close.

You asked who Tyson beat that could have beaten Bowe? I don’t know because Bowe avoided just about anybody that had a chance to beat him, except Holyfield. And he fought Holyfield because Holyfield was the big dog that he was built up to challenge so that he and his management could get the really big money. There’s nothing wrong with that, because that’s how almost all HWs are managed these days, but it didn’t take much to get him the title fight, and then besides Holyfield he was pretty much in hiding.

If Bowe had fought the level of fighter that Tyson fought between the Berbick and Ruddock fights, he would have lost some fights. Were any of those guys better than Bowe? Probably not; but we’ll never know because besides the big paydays against Holyfield, Bowe’s management avoided any real challenges for their meal ticket. Besides Holyfield, Bowe’s next best victory was probably over Larry Donald. That’s pretty sad. You can list some better names like Thomas, Tubbs and Dokes, but they were all well past their primes, and Bowe had a very tough time against Tubbs. What did Tyson do against a younger Tubbs 3 years earlier? Of course, that’s not really a fair question, but if all you want to do is look at Bowe’s performances against Holyfield and compare them to the post prison Tyson performances against Holyfield, then it seems like a pretty fair question.

Bowe was a very good fighter, but please try to be a little objective. His wins over Holyfield were very impressive, but there wasn’t anything else in his career. He was very protected, and simply didn’t have the resume. He certainly had the size and skills to beat Tyson, but he didn’t have any where near the ring accomplishments of Tyson.

When I was making my points in my earlier post I was also responding to Coljimar's comments and that is why I brought up Holyfield. (He said that Bowe never proved himself against the best of the division). Sorry,I should have been more clear.

I disagree with your statement that Bowe would have lost to some of Tyson's opponents between the time he beat Berbick and lost to Ruddock.
Bowe was a very skilled fighter. He had good boxing skills, good power, good chin, good speed for a big man, could fight inside or outside, and had heart. He had no major weaknesses.
If Bowe would have fought Tyson's opponents up until when Tyson fought Ruddock, Bowe would have been undefeated. None of these guys were in Bowe's class.

Outside of Lewis (who Tyson also didn't fight during his prime) who did Bowe avoid?
He knocked out Dokes, Thomas, and Biggs who were considered top fighters during Tysons'prime, but they were considered past their prime.
As mentioned before he beat Donald, Seldon,Coetzer, and Hide. He would have fought Mercer if Mercer had beaten Ferguson but Mercer got upset. Bowe then knocked Ferguson out in 2 rounds. (Ferguson gave Tyson a lot more more trouble)
Just who were all these great fighters (Besides Lewis) that Bowe was avoiding?

The Great John L wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Donald was a pretty skilled boxer and Bowe beat him fairly easily. Coetzer was ranked pretty high when Bowe beat him. Biggs was the top contender for a period during Tyson's reign.

Yes, Biggs was a top contender during Tyson’s reign. However, he wasn’t anything when Bowe fought him.

Ambling Alp wrote:Obviously none of these guys were great. However they were decent and Bowe beat them all easily.
Tysons' best victims, Bruno, Ruddock, Thomas , all of the other alphabet soup boys weren't any closer to the Evander Holyfield level than were to the Biggs, Coetzer, Seldon, Donald level.

Do you really think that Coetzer was comparable to Bruno, Smith, Ruddock, Tucker, Williams, Tubbs, Spinks, etc.!!??!!

Biggs was 30 years old and had only 22 fights when Bowe knokced him out. how washed up could he be? He couldn't have been that much better when he fought Tyson.

No, I don't consider Coetzer, Biggs, Seldon, Donald etc. as good as Bruno, Smith and Ruddock etc.
The point I was trying to make was that Bowe twice beat a fighter that was much better than Bruno, Smith, Ruddock, Tucker etc. He would have beaten those guys as well, only easier than he beat Holyfield.
There is as much of a gap between Holyfield and Bruno, Smith and Ruddock etc. as there is between Bruno,Smith,Ruddock etc and Coetzer,Biggs,Seldon, and Donald etc.

Bowe's win over Holyfield wasn't a fluke. Holyfield fought one his best fights. Bowe was very competitive in their 2nd fight and of course won their third fight. He proved that he was much better than anyone that Tyson ever beat. He deserves to considered with Holyfield, Lewis, and Tyson.

pundit wrote:I revise my earlier rating. My order now is:

1 Lewis
2 Tyson
3 Holyfield
4 Bowe

Prime Tyson was a force Holyfield never was.

Pundit,
Not the "Prime Tyson" BS.
Yes, Prime Tyson had some devastating knockouts.
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with Tucker (who injured his hand early in the fight)
Prime Tyson had trouble with Jesse Ferguson (Who Bowe knocked out in two rounds)
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with James Tillis (who Holyfield beat fairly easily)
Prime Tyson looked mediocre against Smith.
Prime Tyson got knocked out by Buster Douglas (who Holyfield knocked out)

There is no excuse for a 30 year old (Tyson) who hadn't been in many "wars" to lose to a 34 year old (Holyfield) who had been in a lot of wars.
You had it right the first time when you had Holyfield ahead of Tyson.

Ambling Alp wrote:

pundit wrote:I revise my earlier rating. My order now is:

1 Lewis
2 Tyson
3 Holyfield
4 Bowe

Prime Tyson was a force Holyfield never was.

Pundit,
Not the "Prime Tyson" BS.
Yes, Prime Tyson had some devastating knockouts.
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with Tucker (who injured his hand early in the fight)
Prime Tyson had trouble with Jesse Ferguson (Who Bowe knocked out in two rounds)
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with James Tillis (who Holyfield beat fairly easily)
Prime Tyson looked mediocre against Smith.
Prime Tyson got knocked out by Buster Douglas (who Holyfield knocked out)

There is no excuse for a 30 year old (Tyson) who hadn't been in many "wars" to lose to a 34 year old (Holyfield) who had been in a lot of wars.
You had it right the first time when you had Holyfield ahead of Tyson.

I don't think so. Tyson was near untouchable in the late 80s. Holyfield never was.

What happened in 1996 is relatively irrelevant in comparison. Tyson was gone by then. Some deteriorate ealrier, others later.

Lewis
Tyson
Holyfield
Bowe
Butterbean

Ambling Alp wrote:If Bowe would have fought Tyson's opponents up until when Tyson fought Ruddock, Bowe would have been undefeated. None of these guys were in Bowe's class.

Again, I agree that Bowe was better than Tyson’s opponents prior to his prison term, but I just don’t think that you’re looking at this realistically. I’m NOT saying that any of them were better, just that if Bowe had fought the level of world class competition in 10-12 straight fights as Tyson did, that he would have lost a few. Not because they were better, but because not all fighters are at their best for each fight and it exposes a fighter to more styles. And a mark of true greatness is the ability to win even when you’re not at your best and against a variety of styles. Bowe was hardly known as a diligent gym rat. Most of the old time greats lost fights occasionally because they fought better fighters more often than you now see in modern fighter’s careers.

Ambling Alp wrote:Biggs was 30 years old and had only 22 fights when Bowe knokced him out. how washed up could he be? He couldn't have been that much better when he fought Tyson.

Biggs was a top 10 fighter when Tyson beat him, having beaten Tillis, Sims, Snipes and Bey. He was trashed in his next few fights after the Tyson fight and never beat another ranked fighter. I would think that you’d realize that age isn’t always the determining factor in how far a fighters skills have eroded.

Ambling Alp wrote:The point I was trying to make was that Bowe twice beat a fighter that was much better than Bruno, Smith, Ruddock, Tucker etc.

And Wille Meehan beat a fighter twice that was better than Holyfield. Does that mean he was a better fighter than Bowe? Two wins don’t make a career.

Ambling Alp wrote:He would have beaten those guys as well, only easier than he beat Holyfield.

Possibly, but we’ll never know because Bowe chose not to fight anyone that was a real threat, besides the meal ticket. And Bruno, Ruddock and Tucker were all active and ranked during Bowe’s tip toe to his big pay days. He and his management chose to avoid them because they could have upset that big payday.

Ambling Alp wrote:Bowe's win over Holyfield wasn't a fluke. Holyfield fought one his best fights. Bowe was very competitive in their 2nd fight and of course won their third fight. He proved that he was much better than anyone that Tyson ever beat. He deserves to considered with Holyfield, Lewis, and Tyson.

I agree it wasn’t a fluke, and he deserves to be considered with Lewis, Holyfield and Tyson. Just not ranked alongside them.

I suppose it's possible that Bowe could have lost to one the guys that Tyson fought in that period, but it would have been highly unlikely. Anything is possible. He certainly wouldn't have lost to 3 or 4.

Bowe was a very consistent fighter. Up until the Golota fights he almost always performed well. He would have to be well before form to lose to those guys.

As for Biggs, I was just pointing out that he wasn't old nor had he been in a lot of fights. It's interesting that so many of Tyson's opponents were supposedly at their best when they fought Tyson, but then when they lose to someone else not that long afterwards, they declined a lot. What a coincidence.

The Willie Meehan comparison is very valid. Meehan beat Dempsey in 4 round decisons. that doesn't compare to Bowe's great fights with Holyfield.

So Bowe should have fought Bruno, Ruddock or Tucker?
If he would have beat Ruddock people would have said that Ruddock was damaged goods after he got crushed by Lewis. (Tyson fans even say that Ruddock was damaged goods before Ruddock fought Lewis.)

Tucker seemed to be fading the time Bowe was on top. If Bowe would have beaten Tucker, he wouldn't have gotten anymore respect then he did beating thomas and Dokes. Bruce Seldon and Herbie Hide both stopped Tucker. So if you don't think Tucker was washed up, then Seldon and Hide (whom Bowe beat) must not have been that bad.
Which leaves us with Frank Bruno. If not fighting Bruno is all that keep Bowe from being regarded as belonging in the same league as Lewis, Holyfield and Tyson, then he can't be far behind. Hard to imagine Bowe losing to Bruno.

Bowe fought Holyfield 3 times. People say that he only beat one great fighter. (one more than most fighters)

Bowe beat some guys from Tyson's era (Dokes, Tubbs,Thomas) and people say they were washed up.

Bowe beat several undefeated contenders, and people say they weren't any good.

Would it really have been any different if Bowe beat Bruno,Ruddock and Tucker?


John L., You said that Bowe deserves to be considered with Lewis, Holyfield, and Tyson, but not alongside them. Maybe we aren't that far apart. About where do you rank Bowe all time? Top 15, 20, 25, where?

pundit wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:

pundit wrote:I revise my earlier rating. My order now is:

1 Lewis
2 Tyson
3 Holyfield
4 Bowe

Prime Tyson was a force Holyfield never was.

Pundit,
Not the "Prime Tyson" BS.
Yes, Prime Tyson had some devastating knockouts.
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with Tucker (who injured his hand early in the fight)
Prime Tyson had trouble with Jesse Ferguson (Who Bowe knocked out in two rounds)
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with James Tillis (who Holyfield beat fairly easily)
Prime Tyson looked mediocre against Smith.
Prime Tyson got knocked out by Buster Douglas (who Holyfield knocked out)

There is no excuse for a 30 year old (Tyson) who hadn't been in many "wars" to lose to a 34 year old (Holyfield) who had been in a lot of wars.
You had it right the first time when you had Holyfield ahead of Tyson.

I don't think so. Tyson was near untouchable in the late 80s. Holyfield never was.

What happened in 1996 is relatively irrelevant in comparison. Tyson was gone by then. Some deteriorate ealrier, others later.

Pundit, I strongly disagree with all 3 of your points.

- Tyson untouchable in the late 1980's. Well that is one myth.
He had a lot trouble with an inured Tucker in 1987.
Tyson struggled with Ferguson in 1986.
Tyson had a of trouble with James tillis in 1986.
Tyson struggled with Smith in 1987.
Tyson got knocked out by Douglas in 1990.

That's 5 different opponents that Tyson had trouble or lost to.

Watch Holyfield against Tillis,Thomas,Dokes, Rodriques, Stewart, before he won the title.)
The 1996 Holyfield-Tyson fight is irrelevant?
Tyson wasn't considered gone by any means. He was a big favorite going into the Holyfield fight. Tyson looked better against an improved Bruno in 1996 then he did against Bruno in 1989.

Some fighters detoriate earlier, some later? Well shouldn't one factor when rating the career's fighters be how long they can fight at a high level?

Ambling Alp wrote:As for Biggs, I was just pointing out that he wasn't old nor had he been in a lot of fights. It's interesting that so many of Tyson's opponents were supposedly at their best when they fought Tyson, but then when they lose to someone else not that long afterwards, they declined a lot. What a coincidence.

Actually, I don’t really think that Biggs was that great when he fought Tyson either, but basic logic should tell you that he had declined after the Tyson fight when you examine his competition and wins before and after the Tyson fight. That, plus the simple viewing of Biggs pre and post Tyson performances. The fact that Biggs is mentioned as one of Bowe’s better opponents is pretty good evidence for those of us who lack respect for his resume.

Thomas was also on the decline when he fought Tyson, as evidenced not just by watching his eroded skills, but also by his lack of success against decent competition beginning well before the Tyson fight. I don’t think I even have to discuss Dokes, as I’m sure you have to agree that he was a mere shell when he fought Bowe.

Ambling Alp wrote: The Willie Meehan comparison is very valid. Meehan beat Dempsey in 4 round decisons. that doesn't compare to Bowe's great fights with Holyfield.

Yes we agree on both parts. It is relevant, and Meehan beating Dempsey in 4 rounds isn’t the same thing as Bowe beating Holyfield over 12. However, Fat Willie did beat Dempsey twice, and in fact beat quite a few fringe/journeymen types as well.

Ambling Alp wrote:So Bowe should have fought Bruno, Ruddock or Tucker?
If he would have beat Ruddock people would have said that Ruddock was damaged goods after he got crushed by Lewis. (Tyson fans even say that Ruddock was damaged goods before Ruddock fought Lewis.)

No, I wouldn’t have said that. But we’ll never know because Bowe’s other great matchups with Boogie Man, Dokes, Tillery, etc, got in the way of any real opponents.

Ambling Alp wrote:Tucker seemed to be fading the time Bowe was on top. If Bowe would have beaten Tucker, he wouldn't have gotten anymore respect then he did beating thomas and Dokes. Bruce Seldon and Herbie Hide both stopped Tucker.

I don’t agree at all with this statement. Tucker was approaching 40 when he lost to those guys in ‘95+, but had quite a bit left in the early 90’s while Bowe was rolling through all those top contenders. Do you really think Tucker was as gone in ’91 as Dokes was?

Ambling Alp wrote: Which leaves us with Frank Bruno. If not fighting Bruno is all that keep Bowe from being regarded as belonging in the same league as Lewis, Holyfield and Tyson, then he can't be far behind. Hard to imagine Bowe losing to Bruno.

Obviously, Bruno isn’t the only thing missing. Try ANY other top contender besides his meal ticket.

Ambling Alp wrote:Would it really have been any different if Bowe beat Bruno,Ruddock and Tucker?

Not to you, but they are certainly way better names than anyone else on his resume besides his meal ticket. So yes, I think most would have a much better opinion of his accomplishments.

Ambling Alp wrote:John L., You said that Bowe deserves to be considered with Lewis, Holyfield, and Tyson, but not alongside them. Maybe we aren't that far apart. About where do you rank Bowe all time? Top 15, 20, 25, where?

I currently have him at 21.

Ambling Alp wrote:Pundit, I strongly disagree with all 3 of your points.

- Tyson untouchable in the late 1980's. Well that is one myth.

I agree he was always beatable.

Ambling Alp wrote:He had a lot trouble with an inured Tucker in 1987.
Tyson struggled with Ferguson in 1986.
Tyson had a of trouble with James tillis in 1986.
Tyson struggled with Smith in 1987.
Tyson got knocked out by Douglas in 1990.

Not sure I’d agree that he had a great deal of trouble in some of these fights, but I agree with your general premise. He certainly wasn’t untouchable, as proven by the Douglas fight, as well as the Tillis fight, and he also had a pretty good scrap with Bruno (I), although he did squash Frank.

The one thing about Tyson was that he was always pretty hittable, but most of the time his good chin and ferocious persona helped to overcome that particular shortcoming.

Ambling Alp wrote:Watch Holyfield against Tillis,Thomas,Dokes, Rodriques, Stewart, before he won the title.)
The 1996 Holyfield-Tyson fight is irrelevant?
Tyson wasn't considered gone by any means. He was a big favorite going into the Holyfield fight. Tyson looked better against an improved Bruno in 1996 then he did against Bruno in 1989.

You’re right, Tyson did perform better against Bruno in their second fight, but please keep in mind that Frank was getting pretty long in the tooth at that stage of his career, so that might not be too relevant.

Ambling Alp wrote:Some fighters detoriate earlier, some later? Well shouldn't one factor when rating the career's fighters be how long they can fight at a high level?

Yep, as well as a lengthy resume against top contenders. And actually Tyson had some pretty good names on his resume during most of his career, although you could clearly see his enthusiasm for the game decline in the last few years.

Ambling Alp wrote:

pundit wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote: Pundit,
Not the "Prime Tyson" BS.
Yes, Prime Tyson had some devastating knockouts.
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with Tucker (who injured his hand early in the fight)
Prime Tyson had trouble with Jesse Ferguson (Who Bowe knocked out in two rounds)
Prime Tyson had a lot of trouble with James Tillis (who Holyfield beat fairly easily)
Prime Tyson looked mediocre against Smith.
Prime Tyson got knocked out by Buster Douglas (who Holyfield knocked out)

There is no excuse for a 30 year old (Tyson) who hadn't been in many "wars" to lose to a 34 year old (Holyfield) who had been in a lot of wars.
You had it right the first time when you had Holyfield ahead of Tyson.

I don't think so. Tyson was near untouchable in the late 80s. Holyfield never was.

What happened in 1996 is relatively irrelevant in comparison. Tyson was gone by then. Some deteriorate ealrier, others later.

Pundit, I strongly disagree with all 3 of your points.

- Tyson untouchable in the late 1980's. Well that is one myth.
He had a lot trouble with an inured Tucker in 1987.
Tyson struggled with Ferguson in 1986.
Tyson had a of trouble with James tillis in 1986.
Tyson struggled with Smith in 1987.
Tyson got knocked out by Douglas in 1990.

That's 5 different opponents that Tyson had trouble or lost to.

Watch Holyfield against Tillis,Thomas,Dokes, Rodriques, Stewart, before he won the title.)
The 1996 Holyfield-Tyson fight is irrelevant?
Tyson wasn't considered gone by any means. He was a big favorite going into the Holyfield fight. Tyson looked better against an improved Bruno in 1996 then he did against Bruno in 1989.

Some fighters detoriate earlier, some later? Well shouldn't one factor when rating the career's fighters be how long they can fight at a high level?

Sure. But Tyson had 3 or 4 years at the highest level; that's enough. Tyson the super-class heavyweight wasn't a one fight fluke (like, say, Riddick Bowe). This said, had he maintained his late-80s level for, say, 10 years, we would probably compare him with Ali and Louis, not with Holyfield.

As for your other points -- come on. Tyson wasn't at risk of losing any of the 80s fights you list. He didn't make minced meat out of Tucker or Smith as people had expected, but he still won handily. By a similar token, near-prime Holyfield edged out far too close wins only over guys in their mid-40s. And prime Holyfield had a hard time with midget Vaughn Bean. Not everyone fights 100 percent all the time. Prime Ali or prime Louis also had not-so-great but safe fights in between awe-inspiring ones. It's no different with Tyson or Holyfield.

As for Holyfield in 1996, this was indeed Holy's finest. But few would say that the post-prison Tyson with his messed up mind was still prime, even though he was still good enough to prevail in Bruno's reitrement fight. So it wasn't a prime vs. prime competition and you need to compare the Holyfield of this fight with Tyson's best.

And here my nod goes to Tyson, simply because he was THE world's dominating heavyweight at his prime in a way Holyfield never was. He unified the 3 major belts within one year, blasted away highly regarded heavyweights like Berbick and Thomas, and when he met the guy considered the other great heavyweight of the era he took him out in one minute. Holyfield was a great warrior who surprised people repeatedly, but prime Tyson was a bigger force than prime Holyfield -- this is what it comes down to.