BoxRec

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rexob wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You obviously don't rate holyfield at all. Fury looked better against Cunningham. He was woeful against wlad.

Don't get me wrong Holyfield was one of the best ever a brilliantly talented cruiserweight taking on all the heavy and beating most, was some record.

Why would he lose to a slow clumsy guy that barely punches.

Fury boxed fantastic when he beat klit he just did enough to uncrown the champ and great tactics which Fury does need as he likes to brawl. Fury could potentially have beaten anyone with the right tactics.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Rexob wrote:Fury was still learning against Cunningham, the Fury who beat klit would have beat Holyfield, he would have boxed his ears off. Hopefully we will see Fury again just to show the non believers like yourself, what he is about.

Ah, the classic 'but he was still developing!' argument.

Apparently all he had to do to become Willie Pep since he got decked by Cunningham was fight the murderer's row of Christian Hammer, joey Abell and a shop worn Chisora. Being in with those guys sure teaches a guy how to fight better. And the acid test to prove his mission to fistic wizardry was complete, was against a guy who threw no punches

"But he's still developing" argument is true, even Ali as an example got decked early in his career, once by a journeyman and again by a British level fighter while he was developing into the greatest. Cunningham was a former world champIon.

Rexob wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Rexob wrote:Fury was still learning against Cunningham, the Fury who beat klit would have beat Holyfield, he would have boxed his ears off. Hopefully we will see Fury again just to show the non believers like yourself, what he is about.

Ah, the classic 'but he was still developing!' argument.

Apparently all he had to do to become Willie Pep since he got decked by Cunningham was fight the murderer's row of Christian Hammer, joey Abell and a shop worn Chisora. Being in with those guys sure teaches a guy how to fight better. And the acid test to prove his mission to fistic wizardry was complete, was against a guy who threw no punches

"But he's still developing" argument is true, even Ali as an example got decked early in his career, once by a journeyman and again by a British level fighter while he was developing into the greatest. Cunningham was a former world champIon.

Cunningham former world champion ? HW world champion ?

ValMar wrote:

Kalan wrote:Holyfield fought very weak comp at Cruiser. His main weapon was the top of his head -- and he later got knocked out by a Middleweight Champion.

Usyk is a very slick southpaw who doesn't need dirty stuff... He's never lost and it looks like nobody could compete with him... I don't rank Holyfield up there with Haye, Usyk, and Toney -- EH was a little too easy to hit -- but he's definitely among the Top-10 Cruiserweights of all time.

In a Heavyweight matchup, Joshua would crush Holy like a roach... You thought Foreman-Frazier was a stompfest??? Pity poor Mr. Evan Fields.

EH was / is among top 3 CW all time, surely. There is no need to debate about that.

#1 By a distance I would say. I don't see any Cruiser between 1980 and now being able to beat the Holyfield of 86-88.

Those of you who are saying that Holyfield record is patchy are being a bit hard.

Evander has the best Resume of all time in heavyweights. He didn't win all these fights and is therefore not the greatest of all time.

However he beat everyone he faced in his first 15 years as a pro.

Riddock Bowe was a 25 year old undefeated Eddie Futch prodigy. Not many would have beaten Bowe that night. Evander was seconds away from winning the third fight. They were outstanding fights far better than the division can produce today.

Michael Moorer, a shock loss, brutally avenged, looked injured and still could have won the first fight.

Lennox Lewis, close call, not a great fight. Lewis and Bowe beat everyone the faced as well.

I honestly believe that if the Klitschko brothers had taken Holyfield's path they would be mere fighters.

Neither brother would beat the Bowe or Lewis that Holyfield fought.
Wlad does not beat 1996 Tyson either.

Klee Gluckman wrote:Those of you who are saying that Holyfield record is patchy are being a bit hard.

Evander has the best Resume of all time in heavyweights. He didn't win all these fights and is therefore not the greatest of all time.

However he beat everyone he faced in his first 15 years as a pro.

Riddock Bowe was a 25 year old undefeated Eddie Futch prodigy. Not many would have beaten Bowe that night. Evander was seconds away from winning the third fight. They were outstanding fights far better than the division can produce today.

Michael Moorer, a shock loss, brutally avenged, looked injured and still could have won the first fight.

Lennox Lewis, close call, not a great fight. Lewis and Bowe beat everyone the faced as well.

I honestly believe that if the Klitschko brothers had taken Holyfield's path they would be mere fighters.

Neither brother would beat the Bowe or Lewis that Holyfield fought.
Wlad does not beat 1996 Tyson either.

Good post, I agree neither Klitschko beats Bowe or Lewis. Not sure about Wlad vs 1996 Tyson, I could see it going either way.

asdfjkl wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: We're talking about a 210 ish pound guy vs 250 ish pound guys, that's like a cruiserweight vs a super middleweight. You can't beat that difference.

Why not? Froch would beat most CWs

I have no clue who Frog is, but fact remainst that a top welterweight won't beat a top cruiserweight, simple as that.

You said it's like a super middle vs a CW you moron, those were your words

danconnollyeire wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:
Why not? Froch would beat most CWs

I have no clue who Frog is, but fact remainst that a top welterweight won't beat a top cruiserweight, simple as that.

You said it's like a super middle vs a CW you moron, those were your words

Still same story, the top of the lighter weightclass will allmost certainly lose against the top of the heavier weightclass.

jezzamundo wrote:Not sure about Wlad vs 1996 Tyson, I could see it going either way.

It could go either way, Wlad could get knocked out in the first or the second.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

jezzamundo wrote:Not sure about Wlad vs 1996 Tyson, I could see it going either way.

It could go either way, Wlad could get knocked out in the first or the second.

Prime Tyson would win against prime Wlad, but prime Wlad against '96 version of Tyson would be very questionable.

ValMar wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

jezzamundo wrote:Not sure about Wlad vs 1996 Tyson, I could see it going either way.

It could go either way, Wlad could get knocked out in the first or the second.

Prime Tyson would win against prime Wlad, but prime Wlad against '96 version of Tyson would be very questionable.

It seems as though you’re supremely confident that a prime version of Mike Tyson would defeat a Wladimir Klitschko at his best, but let me ask you a few questions…

• Has Mike Tyson ever demonstrated an ability to overcome adversity inside the ring?

• Assuming Mike Tyson was at his prime for the first 37 bouts of his career (before he was defeated by ‘Buster’ Douglas), would the 6’ 6” 245lb Klitschko struggled to defeat any of those opponents, whose average weight was 212lbs?

• Do you think that the Emanuel Steward strategy that Klitschko started using from 2004 would be successful against Mike Tyson? If I recall correctly, Wladimir likes to throw a punch or two, grab his foe, lean all his weight on his shorter opponent during the clinch to wear them down and then push his challenger away to create distance. Didn’t Lennox Lewis use precisely the same tactic against Tyson?

Mike Tyson articulated the following when asked if he was capable at his prime of defeating the Klitschkos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF-sxSipAMs

“I don’t know [if I could beat them]. You know, if I’m in the ring with someone, my intentions is to beat them, to hurt them…

“In reality, even though we don’t want to believe it, athletes get better as time goes on. They don’t get worse.”

“They may not look better, they get better, they’re bigger, they do better vitamins… It’s just a whole different game compared to when I was fighting.”

“We didn’t have the vitamins, we didn’t have the muscle juice that everyone has now… none of that stuff!”

ValMar, I’m not saying you’re wrong by the way, I’m merely curious if you’ve evaluated the situation based on nostalgia and myth or if you’ve carefully scrutinised all the facts.

Enlightened-One wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:
It could go either way, Wlad could get knocked out in the first or the second.

Prime Tyson would win against prime Wlad, but prime Wlad against '96 version of Tyson would be very questionable.

It seems as though you’re supremely confident that a prime version of Mike Tyson would defeat a Wladimir Klitschko at his best, but let me ask you a few questions…

• Has Mike Tyson ever demonstrated an ability to overcome adversity inside the ring?

• Assuming Mike Tyson was at his prime for the first 37 bouts of his career (before he was defeated by ‘Buster’ Douglas), would the 6’ 6” 245lb Klitschko struggled to defeat any of those opponents, whose average weight was 212lbs?

• Do you think that the Emanuel Steward strategy that Klitschko started using from 2004 would be successful against Mike Tyson? If I recall correctly, Wladimir likes to throw a punch or two, grab his foe, lean all his weight on his shorter opponent during the clinch to wear them down and then push his challenger away to create distance. Didn’t Lennox Lewis use precisely the same tactic against Tyson?

Mike Tyson articulated the following when asked if he was capable at his prime of defeating the Klitschkos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF-sxSipAMs

“I don’t know [if I could beat them]. You know, if I’m in the ring with someone, my intentions is to beat them, to hurt them…

“In reality, even though we don’t want to believe it, athletes get better as time goes on. They don’t get worse.”

“They may not look better, they get better, they’re bigger, they do better vitamins… It’s just a whole different game compared to when I was fighting.”

“We didn’t have the vitamins, we didn’t have the muscle juice that everyone has now… none of that stuff!”

ValMar, I’m not saying you’re wrong by the way, I’m merely curious if you’ve evaluated the situation based on nostalgia and myth or if you’ve carefully scrutinised all the facts.

Yes, Lewis used exactly the same tactic against Tyson, but it has to be said that Tyson was beyond shot than. Of course, even prime/peak Tyson was very vulnerable for clinches, so I can see your point, but prime Tyson was dangerous for 36 minutes in the fight, not just 3.

Boxing Writer wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

ValMar wrote:
Prime Tyson would win against prime Wlad, but prime Wlad against '96 version of Tyson would be very questionable.

It seems as though you’re supremely confident that a prime version of Mike Tyson would defeat a Wladimir Klitschko at his best, but let me ask you a few questions…

• Has Mike Tyson ever demonstrated an ability to overcome adversity inside the ring?

• Assuming Mike Tyson was at his prime for the first 37 bouts of his career (before he was defeated by ‘Buster’ Douglas), would the 6’ 6” 245lb Klitschko struggled to defeat any of those opponents, whose average weight was 212lbs?

• Do you think that the Emanuel Steward strategy that Klitschko started using from 2004 would be successful against Mike Tyson? If I recall correctly, Wladimir likes to throw a punch or two, grab his foe, lean all his weight on his shorter opponent during the clinch to wear them down and then push his challenger away to create distance. Didn’t Lennox Lewis use precisely the same tactic against Tyson?

Mike Tyson articulated the following when asked if he was capable at his prime of defeating the Klitschkos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF-sxSipAMs

“I don’t know [if I could beat them]. You know, if I’m in the ring with someone, my intentions is to beat them, to hurt them…

“In reality, even though we don’t want to believe it, athletes get better as time goes on. They don’t get worse.”

“They may not look better, they get better, they’re bigger, they do better vitamins… It’s just a whole different game compared to when I was fighting.”

“We didn’t have the vitamins, we didn’t have the muscle juice that everyone has now… none of that stuff!”

ValMar, I’m not saying you’re wrong by the way, I’m merely curious if you’ve evaluated the situation based on nostalgia and myth or if you’ve carefully scrutinised all the facts.

Yes, Lewis used exactly the same tactic against Tyson, but it has to be said that Tyson was beyond shot than. Of course, even prime/peak Tyson was very vulnerable for clinches, so I can see your point, but prime Tyson was dangerous for 36 minutes in the fight, not just 3.

You have a point, but during Tyson’s prime, such as his first 37 fights, did any of the following opponents who went the distance with ‘Iron’ Mike show any ambition and refrain from resorting to survival mode tactics?
• Mitch Green
• James Tillis
• James Smith
• Tony Tucker

It could be argued that it’s easy to go the distance against punch bags that didn’t punch back.

That’s the problem with Mike Tyson; there are too many unknowns about his prime.

In my mind, Tyson deserves his place in the Hall-of-Fame, but did he ever truly live up to the hype? Nobody knows the answer to that question.

For me, I can’t get over his perceived mental weakness… and I’ve always considered Mike as a proverbial “rose” rather than the “thorn”, because of his track record of “looking good” in ideal conditions, but wilting under pressure and intense heat.

He never found a way to overcome adversity – not even once! And that’s the reason why I believe that a bout between a prime version of the “real” Mike Tyson (not the mythical creature) and Wladimir Klitschko (at his best) would be a highly-competitive affair.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Boxing Writer wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: It seems as though you’re supremely confident that a prime version of Mike Tyson would defeat a Wladimir Klitschko at his best, but let me ask you a few questions…

• Has Mike Tyson ever demonstrated an ability to overcome adversity inside the ring?

• Assuming Mike Tyson was at his prime for the first 37 bouts of his career (before he was defeated by ‘Buster’ Douglas), would the 6’ 6” 245lb Klitschko struggled to defeat any of those opponents, whose average weight was 212lbs?

• Do you think that the Emanuel Steward strategy that Klitschko started using from 2004 would be successful against Mike Tyson? If I recall correctly, Wladimir likes to throw a punch or two, grab his foe, lean all his weight on his shorter opponent during the clinch to wear them down and then push his challenger away to create distance. Didn’t Lennox Lewis use precisely the same tactic against Tyson?

Mike Tyson articulated the following when asked if he was capable at his prime of defeating the Klitschkos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF-sxSipAMs

“I don’t know [if I could beat them]. You know, if I’m in the ring with someone, my intentions is to beat them, to hurt them…

“In reality, even though we don’t want to believe it, athletes get better as time goes on. They don’t get worse.”

“They may not look better, they get better, they’re bigger, they do better vitamins… It’s just a whole different game compared to when I was fighting.”

“We didn’t have the vitamins, we didn’t have the muscle juice that everyone has now… none of that stuff!”

ValMar, I’m not saying you’re wrong by the way, I’m merely curious if you’ve evaluated the situation based on nostalgia and myth or if you’ve carefully scrutinised all the facts.

Yes, Lewis used exactly the same tactic against Tyson, but it has to be said that Tyson was beyond shot than. Of course, even prime/peak Tyson was very vulnerable for clinches, so I can see your point, but prime Tyson was dangerous for 36 minutes in the fight, not just 3.

You have a point, but during Tyson’s prime, such as his first 37 fights, did any of the following opponents who went the distance with ‘Iron’ Mike show any ambition and refrain from resorting to survival mode tactics?
• Mitch Green
• James Tillis
• James Smith
• Tony Tucker

It could be argued that it’s easy to go the distance against punch bags that didn’t punch back.

That’s the problem with Mike Tyson; there are too many unknowns about his prime.

In my mind, Tyson deserves his place in the Hall-of-Fame, but did he ever truly live up to the hype? Nobody knows the answer to that question.

For me, I can’t get over his perceived mental weakness… and I’ve always considered Mike as a proverbial “rose” rather than the “thorn”, because of his track record of “looking good” in ideal conditions, but wilting under pressure and intense heat.

He never found a way to overcome adversity – not even once! And that’s the reason why I believe that a bout between a prime version of the “real” Mike Tyson (not the mythical creature) and Wladimir Klitschko (at his best) would be a highly-competitive affair.

Lol. And I guess Wlad overcame a ton of adversity. Every time he fought someone competent who could punch and applied pressure he would fold like a cheap deck chair or struggle monumentally. the guy almost lost to Sam Peter ffs. And you think he would be competitive with Tyson? Oh wait, I guess it's because Wlad is TOO BIG TOO STRONG NUTRITION MODERN TRAINING METHODS

And no, the 1996 Tyson would have no problems with Wlad either.

Agreed, Bruno might well flatten wlad.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Boxing Writer wrote:
Yes, Lewis used exactly the same tactic against Tyson, but it has to be said that Tyson was beyond shot than. Of course, even prime/peak Tyson was very vulnerable for clinches, so I can see your point, but prime Tyson was dangerous for 36 minutes in the fight, not just 3.

You have a point, but during Tyson’s prime, such as his first 37 fights, did any of the following opponents who went the distance with ‘Iron’ Mike show any ambition and refrain from resorting to survival mode tactics?
• Mitch Green
• James Tillis
• James Smith
• Tony Tucker

It could be argued that it’s easy to go the distance against punch bags that didn’t punch back.

That’s the problem with Mike Tyson; there are too many unknowns about his prime.

In my mind, Tyson deserves his place in the Hall-of-Fame, but did he ever truly live up to the hype? Nobody knows the answer to that question.

For me, I can’t get over his perceived mental weakness… and I’ve always considered Mike as a proverbial “rose” rather than the “thorn”, because of his track record of “looking good” in ideal conditions, but wilting under pressure and intense heat.

He never found a way to overcome adversity – not even once! And that’s the reason why I believe that a bout between a prime version of the “real” Mike Tyson (not the mythical creature) and Wladimir Klitschko (at his best) would be a highly-competitive affair.

Lol. And I guess Wlad overcame a ton of adversity. Every time he fought someone competent who could punch and applied pressure he would fold like a cheap deck chair or struggle monumentally. the guy almost lost to Sam Peter ffs. And you think he would be competitive with Tyson? Oh wait, I guess it's because Wlad is TOO BIG TOO STRONG NUTRITION MODERN TRAINING METHODS

And no, the 1996 Tyson would have no problems with Wlad either.

What did Wladimir's resume look like from the second fight onwards that Manny Steward took over his training? Do you flatly-refuse to consider the possibility that fighters can improve... or do you prefer to only consider the weakest version of Klitschko due to your personal favouritism of Tyson?

Enlightened-One wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:
It could go either way, Wlad could get knocked out in the first or the second.

Prime Tyson would win against prime Wlad, but prime Wlad against '96 version of Tyson would be very questionable.

It seems as though you’re supremely confident that a prime version of Mike Tyson would defeat a Wladimir Klitschko at his best, but let me ask you a few questions…

• Has Mike Tyson ever demonstrated an ability to overcome adversity inside the ring?

• Assuming Mike Tyson was at his prime for the first 37 bouts of his career (before he was defeated by ‘Buster’ Douglas), would the 6’ 6” 245lb Klitschko struggled to defeat any of those opponents, whose average weight was 212lbs?

• Do you think that the Emanuel Steward strategy that Klitschko started using from 2004 would be successful against Mike Tyson? If I recall correctly, Wladimir likes to throw a punch or two, grab his foe, lean all his weight on his shorter opponent during the clinch to wear them down and then push his challenger away to create distance. Didn’t Lennox Lewis use precisely the same tactic against Tyson?

Mike Tyson articulated the following when asked if he was capable at his prime of defeating the Klitschkos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF-sxSipAMs

“I don’t know [if I could beat them]. You know, if I’m in the ring with someone, my intentions is to beat them, to hurt them…

“In reality, even though we don’t want to believe it, athletes get better as time goes on. They don’t get worse.”

“They may not look better, they get better, they’re bigger, they do better vitamins… It’s just a whole different game compared to when I was fighting.”

“We didn’t have the vitamins, we didn’t have the muscle juice that everyone has now… none of that stuff!”

ValMar, I’m not saying you’re wrong by the way, I’m merely curious if you’ve evaluated the situation based on nostalgia and myth or if you’ve carefully scrutinised all the facts.

There is something like nostalgia, Tyson is a year younger than me, and I can remember strong and special aura around him. He was extremely popular (someone would tell "notorious"), I have a lot of friends who are not boxing fans, but know him. OK, this topic is on a "fantasy land", and everything is possible to imagine, but, honestly, I believe that prime Tyson (before Douglas) would win every HW (born 1960-1980), except Lewis, and perhaps Holyfield. I respect Wladimir, he was/is a genuine champion, and he could use his advantages (height, reach, power, shape/weight) properly, but his questionable chin is the key factor in the fantasy match against prime Tyson. Tyson was so vicious, with lethal combinations, and I am convinced that E. Steward could not help Wlad....Anyway, I feel that you overestimate the "size factor" generally speaking...Of course, it is pretty important factor, but not the only one...

Judging who you think would win a fantasy fight used to be so difficult. Thinking about who was the smarter fighter, who could adapt mid fight to alter an outcome. Who had more speed, better chin, power, stamina.

Now it's easy, onto boxrec and see who weighed more. Sorry Joe Louis, there is no way you are beating Matt Skelton. Ezzard Charles please, Arreola is knocking you out. Muhammad Ali, how do you ever expect to lay a glove on the dancing feet of Tyson Fury...

Not the Tyson Fury that fought Cunningham though, he wasn't PRIME

Lenny wrote:Judging who you think would win a fantasy fight used to be so difficult. Thinking about who was the smarter fighter, who could adapt mid fight to alter an outcome. Who had more speed, better chin, power, stamina.

Now it's easy, onto boxrec and see who weighed more. Sorry Joe Louis, there is no way you are beating Matt Skelton. Ezzard Charles please, Arreola is knocking you out. Muhammad Ali, how do you ever expect to lay a glove on the dancing feet of Tyson Fury...

Not the Tyson Fury that fought Cunningham though, he wasn't PRIME

Pretty witty post !

Enlightened-One wrote: What did Wladimir's resume look like from the second fight onwards that Manny Steward took over his training? Do you flatly-refuse to consider the possibility that fighters can improve... or do you prefer to only consider the weakest version of Klitschko due to your personal favouritism of Tyson?

Wlad fought garbage in his 'new improved' era. He used his size better and lowered his output. Great. He also fought noone who was capable of putting it on him for sustained periods. Oh wait, he fought one. Povetkin. And had to cheat, repeatedly throughout the contest, to win.

Which version of Wlad do you think would have the better chance against Tyson? The one who actually threw punches? Or the one who was scared stiff and turned into an octopus whenever adversity knocked on the door? Either version is getting knocked out, but at least the early Wlad could have given Tyson some heat.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Agreed, Bruno might well flatten wlad.

I would have bet a decent chunk on Frank. He could have absorbed more than Wlad could before going down, and Frank always managed to land something whoever he was in against.

Some of the comments in this thread are fuckin insane.
"Holyfield a solid top 3 cruiser"??
Have you lost your f@kin mind?
Holy would DECIMATE all current comp and all previous comp.
Holyfield could have probably stayed champ forever if he could have stayed at cruiser.

Jon Saxon wrote: Holyfield could have probably stayed champ forever if he could have stayed at cruiser.

It is no question he is the best of all time cruiser.

Keko wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote: Holyfield could have probably stayed champ forever if he could have stayed at cruiser.

It is no question he is the best of all time cruiser.

I think of all weight divisions picking the number one Cruiser of all time is the easiest pick.

Flump wrote:

Keko wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote: Holyfield could have probably stayed champ forever if he could have stayed at cruiser.

It is no question he is the best of all time cruiser.

I think of all weight divisions picking the number one Cruiser of all time is the easiest pick.

Yes, Holyfield was a great champion, there is no need to speak about. David Haye is CW #2 (all time), in my opinion. Usyk has potential, a genuine potential to become the best, if he decide to stay at CW. Personally, I would like see him at HW, as soon as possible.

Blodhemn wrote:Could Holyfield actually pass a modern PED test? And I mean currently. He was so loaded it's got to be still swimming around in his system.

I guess the argument can be made his opponents were taking too.
But, I hate to make equal conclusions when their is evidence against one party.