BoxRec

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 04:48**

Probably it was a shoulder injury. Anyway, it wasn't a fight to judge Holyfield on it. Moorer got lucky to have such version of Holyfield in front of him. Anyway, I had it draw without a KD, which actually gave the edge to Holy. The Holy-Moorer matchup would have most often gone like it had actually gone in their 2nd meeting.

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 05:12**

Moorer arguably would be Tyson's best win.

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 08:58**

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 13:00 Holyfield beats Tyson H2H but realistically there are probably guys Holyfield loses to who Tyson beats.

Holyfield lost to Moorer and I've yet to meet anyone who ranks Moorer ahead of Tyson.

Riddick Bowe would've beaten Tyson.

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 10:39**

If we are really going to compare Holyfield and Tyson objectively, we can't count fights that didn't happen. What we think Tyson would have not done against Moorer and Bowe don't count.

I will say Holyfield's poor performance against Moorer in the first fight should count against him. There did seem to be something wrong with him, but he took the fight and was beaten decisively.
However, most of the rest of the evidence favors Holyfield. He won the head to head convincingly. To overcome that, Tyson would have to have big edges elsewhere which he simply doesn't have. Both fought Douglas and of course Holyfield did much better.

Tyson did beat a lot of good but not great fighters; as did Holyfield. I guess you could argue that Tyson had an easier time more often against these kind of guys but that simply isn't enough to rate him higher.

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 19:02**

Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 04:03
AntonioMartin wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 19:03
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 13:18 Holyfield was badly injured when he lost to Moorer, and destroyed him with five KDs in the rematch when he was uninjured.
Supposedly had a heart condition, too.
That proved to be a misdiagnosis but a quarter of a century later the story persists

thats why I say "supposedly" lol

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 20:09**

AntonioMartin wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 19:02
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 04:03
AntonioMartin wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 19:03

Supposedly had a heart condition, too.
That proved to be a misdiagnosis but a quarter of a century later the story persists
thats why I say "supposedly" lol

What?

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 22:04**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 20:09
AntonioMartin wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 19:02
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 04:03

That proved to be a misdiagnosis but a quarter of a century later the story persists
thats why I say "supposedly" lol
What?

He had "stiff" heart I thought. Was quite serious if I remember correctly.

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 22:35**

oogiebe wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 22:04
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 20:09
AntonioMartin wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 19:02

thats why I say "supposedly" lol
What?
He had "stiff" heart I thought. Was quite serious if I remember correctly.

Too much morphine. Just questioning the supposedly.

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 22:42**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 22:35
oogiebe wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 22:04
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 20:09

What?
He had "stiff" heart I thought. Was quite serious if I remember correctly.
Too much morphine. Just questioning the supposedly.

Supposedly means we thought he had it, because we were told he did.

Im not sure what came of that though...

Posted: **01 Dec 2020, 23:07**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 22:35
oogiebe wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 22:04
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑01 Dec 2020, 20:09

What?
He had "stiff" heart I thought. Was quite serious if I remember correctly.
Too much morphine. Just questioning the supposedly.

I know you were. Not sure why one would question it. For me, I was just trying to recall his condition.

Posted: **02 Dec 2020, 17:55**

detamour wrote: ↑07 Nov 2020, 06:38
vitalyjohnson wrote: ↑06 Nov 2020, 12:50
chrisjs1985 wrote: ↑06 Nov 2020, 12:47 Troll post. It's hard to tell with Tyson fanatics because they sound like trolls but I suspect you are mocking here.
He had lots of bad things happen to him. If he had better life and did steroids like Evander Real Deal, what do you think? I am not sure but Iron Mike was amazing.

To quote his nutty mentor Cus, he lacked Character and Mental Toughness. He Succumbed to the Fire because he could not control his fears.

Or he just got beaten by better fighters. It happens in sport. If we are going to talk about outside the ring behavior effecting fighter ability - sweet pea partied and coked on. Therefore he should be rated above sugar ray robinson.

Posted: **03 Dec 2020, 00:10**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 09:18
bwu wrote: ↑29 Nov 2020, 21:30 I picked Tyson over Holyfield when they were supposed to fight in '91. I picked Tyson over Holyfield when they finally fought. I picked Tyson over Holyfield in the rematch. If they were to have a "Legends Exhibition" today, I might just pick Tyson.

With that understood, Holyfield is 2-0 in their series. He knocked the man out the first time (which, incidentally, was also one of the all time great career comebacks) and, for all intents and purposes, made him quit the second time. Arguing Tyson's superiority is an insult.
If they were to fight tomorrow I'd definitely still be taking Holyfield.

I can't say I would've picked Holyfield in 1991 or 1996 as I was too young to care, but like most at the time I probably would've favored Tyson because he was the more well known and famous fighter.

With the knowledge I have now though, I can't see Holyfield ever losing to Mike.

Not even in 1989.

Buster Douglas beat the sh*t out of Tyson in pretty much one sided fashion. In his very next fight Holyfield knocked out Douglas in 3 with minimal difficulty.

That's yet another example of how he was better. Aside from the 2 head to head victories.

Whether Tyson had an off night or not, I think one of the greatest shames of 90s boxing is that Buster only showed up like that once. Every time I watch that fight he just looks so good.

Posted: **03 Dec 2020, 04:39**

p4p1 wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 00:10
gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 09:18
bwu wrote: ↑29 Nov 2020, 21:30 I picked Tyson over Holyfield when they were supposed to fight in '91. I picked Tyson over Holyfield when they finally fought. I picked Tyson over Holyfield in the rematch. If they were to have a "Legends Exhibition" today, I might just pick Tyson.

With that understood, Holyfield is 2-0 in their series. He knocked the man out the first time (which, incidentally, was also one of the all time great career comebacks) and, for all intents and purposes, made him quit the second time. Arguing Tyson's superiority is an insult.
If they were to fight tomorrow I'd definitely still be taking Holyfield.

I can't say I would've picked Holyfield in 1991 or 1996 as I was too young to care, but like most at the time I probably would've favored Tyson because he was the more well known and famous fighter.

With the knowledge I have now though, I can't see Holyfield ever losing to Mike.

Not even in 1989.

Buster Douglas beat the sh*t out of Tyson in pretty much one sided fashion. In his very next fight Holyfield knocked out Douglas in 3 with minimal difficulty.

That's yet another example of how he was better. Aside from the 2 head to head victories.
Whether Tyson had an off night or not, I think one of the greatest shames of 90s boxing is that Buster only showed up like that once. Every time I watch that fight he just looks so good.

Douglas was on the rise prior to facing Tyson. He had a decent winning streak and comfortably handled Berbick and McCall just before Tyson. The fact, that he declined right after Tyson, doesn't necessarily points, that he wasn't good before. In the late 80s he looked like a competetive matchup for everyone.

Posted: **03 Dec 2020, 07:28**

- See the usual crusted buttes building their Tower of Babble absent any relevant history.

IBRO has always ranked Tyson over Field including their 2020 update .

Tyson was the Fighter of the 80s after a 37-0, 33 KO sweep that cleaned out the fetid stink of DKing and Lar to consolidate the 4 belts then existent. 21 yrs old as a reclaimed ghetto rat he had a $50 mil retirement annuity whenever he chose to retire as the grandest purse earner in history.

Field, Lewie, and BigDummy still in their heavywt BigBoy trainers. 90s he's had his HOF team die, put on dangerous psych meds to be tag teamed by King and Givens where he becomes a busted flush of a felon and part time 4 rd fighter being propped up by King working from paycheck to paycheck, 11-3, 7 KO. 00s sees him dwindle to 4-3, 4 KO before his train wreck came gring to a halt.

He just sold 1.5 mil PPVs at age 54. Field, Lewie, and BigDummy combined in an ol'git 3x3 series wouldn't crack 0.5 mil.

And I don't even like the guy any more than I like the 3 Amigos.

Mike a record setter that won't ever be Broken. The others just pretenders.

Posted: **03 Dec 2020, 08:20**

As if being a cash cow somehow makes a one better as a boxer.

Posted: **03 Dec 2020, 12:26**

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 07:28 - See the usual crusted buttes building their Tower of Babble absent any relevant history.

IBRO has always ranked Tyson over Field including their 2020 update .

Tyson was the Fighter of the 80s after a 37-0, 33 KO sweep that cleaned out the fetid stink of DKing and Lar to consolidate the 4 belts then existent. 21 yrs old as a reclaimed ghetto rat he had a $50 mil retirement annuity whenever he chose to retire as the grandest purse earner in history.

Field, Lewie, and BigDummy still in their heavywt BigBoy trainers. 90s he's had his HOF team die, put on dangerous psych meds to be tag teamed by King and Givens where he becomes a busted flush of a felon and part time 4 rd fighter being propped up by King working from paycheck to paycheck, 11-3, 7 KO. 00s sees him dwindle to 4-3, 4 KO before his train wreck came gring to a halt.

He just sold 1.5 mil PPVs at age 54. Field, Lewie, and BigDummy combined in an ol'git 3x3 series wouldn't crack 0.5 mil.

And I don't even like the guy any more than I like the 3 Amigos.

Mike a record setter that won't ever be Broken. The others just pretenders.

The constant "Field" slur is rich.

Remember when Tyson paid Ruddock extra rather than take a steroid test?

No, didn't think you would.

Posted: **04 Dec 2020, 15:02**

Holy is better than tyson by any benchmark for me. He beat tyson twice h2h for starters. He fought in a better era against bowe and lewis. He had a longer career and beat better fighters.

His cruiser and then heavy record early on was as good as tyson's too.

The main thing to consider tho is Holy had heart. One of the bravest, toughest fighters ever. Tyson never won a fight he looked like he may lose.

Posted: **04 Dec 2020, 16:36**

cfang wrote: ↑04 Dec 2020, 15:02 Tyson never won a fight he looked like he may lose.

Botha.

Also he iced the great Ettiene with a broken back.

Posted: **05 Dec 2020, 07:37**

Holyfield at his best, never reached the heights & status of Iron Mike Tyson.
However, Holyfield had longevity & competition over Tyson.

Not much between the 2 who had very different careers from eachother, despite fighting in the same era for a large portion of their careers.

Prime Tyson vs Prime Holyfield would have been much more competitive than when they eventually for in 96'

Posted: **07 Dec 2020, 08:50**

Trent wrote: ↑02 Dec 2020, 17:55
detamour wrote: ↑07 Nov 2020, 06:38
vitalyjohnson wrote: ↑06 Nov 2020, 12:50

He had lots of bad things happen to him. If he had better life and did steroids like Evander Real Deal, what do you think? I am not sure but Iron Mike was amazing.

To quote his nutty mentor Cus, he lacked Character and Mental Toughness. He Succumbed to the Fire because he could not control his fears.
Or he just got beaten by better fighters. It happens in sport. If we are going to talk about outside the ring behavior effecting fighter ability - sweet pea partied and coked on. Therefore he should be rated above sugar ray robinson.

Michael gerard Tyson , lacked character. hIS damn mentor cus always went on about that to him, and in that epect Michael Gerard Tyson failed miserably as shown throughout all his ring defeats were he Surrendered everytime and never got of the canvas to win at no stage of his career ever. Evander, was born with mental toughness as shown, when he faced down Tyson yr s before as an Amatuer right in Front of Emmanuel Steward at a US Olympic training Camp. See, you hate the truth eh? Tyson, was a Mugger , Rapist, Woman Beater, Man beater and a ALL ROUND FAKE GUY AND DID i forget he moleste atlass 12 yr old niece too.

Posted: **07 Dec 2020, 16:45**

DrDuke wrote: ↑04 Dec 2020, 16:36
cfang wrote: ↑04 Dec 2020, 15:02 Tyson never won a fight he looked like he may lose.
Actually this is true :-)

Botha.

Also he iced the great Ettiene with a broken back.

Posted: **07 Dec 2020, 20:15**

DrDuke wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 04:39
p4p1 wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 00:10
gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Nov 2020, 09:18

If they were to fight tomorrow I'd definitely still be taking Holyfield.

I can't say I would've picked Holyfield in 1991 or 1996 as I was too young to care, but like most at the time I probably would've favored Tyson because he was the more well known and famous fighter.

With the knowledge I have now though, I can't see Holyfield ever losing to Mike.

Not even in 1989.

Buster Douglas beat the sh*t out of Tyson in pretty much one sided fashion. In his very next fight Holyfield knocked out Douglas in 3 with minimal difficulty.

That's yet another example of how he was better. Aside from the 2 head to head victories.
Whether Tyson had an off night or not, I think one of the greatest shames of 90s boxing is that Buster only showed up like that once. Every time I watch that fight he just looks so good.
Douglas was on the rise prior to facing Tyson. He had a decent winning streak and comfortably handled Berbick and McCall just before Tyson. The fact, that he declined right after Tyson, doesn't necessarily points, that he wasn't good before. In the late 80s he looked like a competetive matchup for everyone.

He stopped Mike Williams with the same nasty ko combo on the Tyson/spinks card. Anyone who saw that knew what he was capable of.

I gave him no chance until after rd1.

Posted: **07 Dec 2020, 20:17**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 20:15
DrDuke wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 04:39
p4p1 wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 00:10
Whether Tyson had an off night or not, I think one of the greatest shames of 90s boxing is that Buster only showed up like that once. Every time I watch that fight he just looks so good.
Douglas was on the rise prior to facing Tyson. He had a decent winning streak and comfortably handled Berbick and McCall just before Tyson. The fact, that he declined right after Tyson, doesn't necessarily points, that he wasn't good before. In the late 80s he looked like a competetive matchup for everyone.
He stopped Mike Williams with the same nasty ko combo on the Tyson/spinks card. Anyone who saw that knew what he was capable of.

I gave him no chance until after rd1.

Agree. I remember thinking he really came to fight after round 1 and handled himself well. My late dad commented, "f'n japs, they always make the right deals."

Posted: **07 Dec 2020, 20:25**

oogiebe wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 20:17
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 20:15
DrDuke wrote: ↑03 Dec 2020, 04:39

Douglas was on the rise prior to facing Tyson. He had a decent winning streak and comfortably handled Berbick and McCall just before Tyson. The fact, that he declined right after Tyson, doesn't necessarily points, that he wasn't good before. In the late 80s he looked like a competetive matchup for everyone.
He stopped Mike Williams with the same nasty ko combo on the Tyson/spinks card. Anyone who saw that knew what he was capable of.

I gave him no chance until after rd1.
Agree. I remember thinking he really came to fight after round 1 and handled himself well. My late dad commented, "f'n japs, they always make the right deals."

Did your Dad think the Japanese had fixed the fight or something?

Posted: **07 Dec 2020, 20:47**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 20:25
oogiebe wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 20:17
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 20:15

He stopped Mike Williams with the same nasty ko combo on the Tyson/spinks card. Anyone who saw that knew what he was capable of.

I gave him no chance until after rd1.
Agree. I remember thinking he really came to fight after round 1 and handled himself well. My late dad commented, "f'n japs, they always make the right deals."
Did your Dad think the Japanese had fixed the fight or something?

Hah, he was saying that they were the only ones who would host this 'mismatch' and ended up with a historic event.

BoxRec

Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield

Re: Mike Tyson better than Holyfield