BoxRec

How good was Alex Stewart, the heavyweight fighter of the 1990s. Looking at his record he fought three legends in Holyfield (twice), Tyson and Foreman. World Champs Moorer and Maskaev too.

I understand in the Foreman fight he made a real mess of George, busted him up; before losing a majority decision over 10 rounds. Was the decision ever disputed?

http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer

Solid fighter, not good enough to handle the very best. But he would be in the top 5 now and a live dog against either Klitschko. Yeah, George's face was massacred in that one. He also had an insane war with Ezra Sellers. The Evander rematch he didn't give much of an effort and he was either horrified or paid off against Tyson.The Moorer brawl is an underrated scrap. Michael nailed him with some insane uppercuts. But all and all he was a solid fighter who provided good action fights.

A very strong puncher but not particularly fast or skilled. Showed resilience vs Foreman, Holyfield and Moorer but mostly just showed he could take a beating. Top 5 now? Yes, but he's made to order for either Klitschko brother, his power and relative athleticism (compared to the likes of Chagaev, Brock, Thompson) mean he has a shadow of a chance vs Wladimir but that's it.

He made the Foreman fight very close but I think Foreman pulled it out. But Foreman's face was one of the worst I've ever seen a prizefighter . . he looked like the Elephant Man!!!

Prime Stewart wouldn't win a round against either Klitschko and he never beat a top ten fighter. Average at best. Haye would toy with him, so would Adamek. Povetkin would stop him and Arreola and Chambers would also beat him.

He would have slaughtered Arreola.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

He would have slaughtered Arreola.

Are you not looking through rose tinted specs Saad? Stewart was nothing special at all.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

He would have slaughtered Arreola.

Are you not looking through rose tinted specs Saad? Stewart was nothing special at all.

I never said he was. Just a solid guy in a great era. Arreola is garbage. You talk about never beating anyone and then mention fatty? Stewart had a war with Holyfield but he couldn't win a round from a Klitschko?

You don't have to be special to be relevant in this era. It's the worst in the history of the Sport. Honestly, your post did make me laugh out loud. I'd favor him over everyone but the top 3. And no way he loses to jiggly jugs.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

He would have slaughtered Arreola.

Are you not looking through rose tinted specs Saad? Stewart was nothing special at all.

I never said he was. Just a solid guy in a great era. Arreola is garbage. You talk about never beating anyone and then mention fatty? Stewart had a war with Holyfield but he couldn't win a round from a Klitschko?

You don't have to be special to be relevant in this era. It's the worst in the history of the Sport. Honestly, your post did make me laugh out loud. I'd favor him over everyone but the top 3. And no way he loses to jiggly jugs.

We'll have to disagree mate. Opinions is opinions.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote: Are you not looking through rose tinted specs Saad? Stewart was nothing special at all.

I never said he was. Just a solid guy in a great era. Arreola is garbage. You talk about never beating anyone and then mention fatty? Stewart had a war with Holyfield but he couldn't win a round from a Klitschko?

You don't have to be special to be relevant in this era. It's the worst in the history of the Sport. Honestly, your post did make me laugh out loud. I'd favor him over everyone but the top 3. And no way he loses to jiggly jugs.

We'll have to disagree mate. Opinions is opinions.

Yup, it's a shame yours comes out on the losing end this time.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
I never said he was. Just a solid guy in a great era. Arreola is garbage. You talk about never beating anyone and then mention fatty? Stewart had a war with Holyfield but he couldn't win a round from a Klitschko?

You don't have to be special to be relevant in this era. It's the worst in the history of the Sport. Honestly, your post did make me laugh out loud. I'd favor him over everyone but the top 3. And no way he loses to jiggly jugs.

We'll have to disagree mate. Opinions is opinions.

Yup, it's a shame yours comes out on the losing end this time.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
I never said he was. Just a solid guy in a great era. Arreola is garbage. You talk about never beating anyone and then mention fatty? Stewart had a war with Holyfield but he couldn't win a round from a Klitschko?

You don't have to be special to be relevant in this era. It's the worst in the history of the Sport. Honestly, your post did make me laugh out loud. I'd favor him over everyone but the top 3. And no way he loses to jiggly jugs.

We'll have to disagree mate. Opinions is opinions.

Yup, it's a shame yours comes out on the losing end this time.

I'll give you Arreola, but Povetkin would tear him apart.

keithmoonhangover wrote:I'll give you Arreola, but Povetkin would tear him apart.

Stewart-Arreola would have been a close and very entertaining fight. Both are slow of hand and foot, and are good offensive fighters. Arreola isn't much, but neither was Stewart.

Stewart was more competitive with a prime Holyfield than Arreola would be with Holyfield now. Though i must admit I can't think of a single win Alex had worth mentioning.

You know, I used to love watching Alex Stewart. He was a big strong fella, a big hitter, vulnerable to a big shot himself, prone to being incredibly frustrating, lackadaisical in training & got involved in some unwatchable mauls: everything a proper heavyweight fringe contender should be.

Stewart vs Arreola? Comparisons are odious, but Stewart was like Travis Walker times five or six, imo. If Stewart found Arreola's chin like that, I'm not sure he'd get up.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

We'll have to disagree mate. Opinions is opinions.

Yup, it's a shame yours comes out on the losing end this time.

I'll give you Arreola, but Povetkin would tear him apart.

Given Povetkin's handlers have yet to put him in with anyone who can punch, I have serious doubts. Povetkin is there to get hit and Stewart's power was his best asset.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Solid fighter, not good enough to handle the very best. But he would be in the top 5 now and a live dog against either Klitschko. Yeah, George's face was massacred in that one. He also had an insane war with Ezra Sellers. The Evander rematch he didn't give much of an effort and he was either horrified or paid off against Tyson.The Moorer brawl is an underrated scrap. Michael nailed him with some insane uppercuts. But all and all he was a solid fighter who provided good action fights.

Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

dempseyfire wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Yup, it's a shame yours comes out on the losing end this time.

I'll give you Arreola, but Povetkin would tear him apart.

Given Povetkin's handlers have yet to put him in with anyone who can punch, I have serious doubts. Povetkin is there to get hit and Stewart's power was his best asset.

It's his ONLY asset.

Rocky Balboa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Solid fighter, not good enough to handle the very best. But he would be in the top 5 now and a live dog against either Klitschko. Yeah, George's face was massacred in that one. He also had an insane war with Ezra Sellers. The Evander rematch he didn't give much of an effort and he was either horrified or paid off against Tyson.The Moorer brawl is an underrated scrap. Michael nailed him with some insane uppercuts. But all and all he was a solid fighter who provided good action fights.

Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Solid fighter, not good enough to handle the very best. But he would be in the top 5 now and a live dog against either Klitschko. Yeah, George's face was massacred in that one. He also had an insane war with Ezra Sellers. The Evander rematch he didn't give much of an effort and he was either horrified or paid off against Tyson.The Moorer brawl is an underrated scrap. Michael nailed him with some insane uppercuts. But all and all he was a solid fighter who provided good action fights.

Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

Why would he need to? Stewart was made to order for Tyson.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote: Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

Why would he need to? Stewart was made to order for Tyson.

I'm not interested in a long drawn out debate over such a meaningless fight. Tyson never hit him with anything that would hurt an ant. IF there was a pay off you would have to ask King why. Like I said, I think Alex was terrified and went down to avoid getting hit.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

Why would he need to? Stewart was made to order for Tyson.

I'm not interested in a long drawn out debate over such a meaningless fight. Tyson never hit him with anything that would hurt an ant. IF there was a pay off you would have to ask King why. Like I said, I think Alex was terrified and went down to avoid getting hit.

Fair play mate.

I think Stewart was a victim of matchmaking. I remember at the time (when he was undefated) the pree slaughtered him over his feeble competition. To go from Terry Armstrong to Evander Holyfield was too much of a jump IMHO.

Not only that, they never learned from their mistakes. After Holyfield, he fought a couple of journeyman, and then the Tyson fight. Then another journeyman, then Michael Moorer.

Matchmaking is an underrated facet of boxing. A fighter needs to be challenged but still have a chance to win. They should have gradually built him up before taking on Holyfield.

Even after the Holyfield fight, maybe one easy fight, then a fringe contender, then a legitimate contender, and then maybe someone like Tyson.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Solid fighter, not good enough to handle the very best. But he would be in the top 5 now and a live dog against either Klitschko. Yeah, George's face was massacred in that one. He also had an insane war with Ezra Sellers. The Evander rematch he didn't give much of an effort and he was either horrified or paid off against Tyson.The Moorer brawl is an underrated scrap. Michael nailed him with some insane uppercuts. But all and all he was a solid fighter who provided good action fights.

Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

Watch the fight, Tyson's second punch, a right hand, lands on top of Stewart's head, resulting in the first KD.

The last KD, a left hook lands on Alex's jaw, putting him down for the third & final time!

Rocky Balboa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote: Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

Watch the fight, Tyson's second punch, a right hand, lands on top of Stewart's head, resulting in the first KD.

The last KD, a left hook lands on Alex's jaw, putting him down for the third & final time!

I agree with you. Tyson lands a number of heavy shots on Stewart and Stewart went down, so what? It's not like he went down from a soft shot and stayed down.

The Stewart fight was further evidence of just how good Tyson was.

Rocky Balboa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote: Paid off in the Tyson fight? You don't have to watch the fight more than once to see that Tyson was on him STRAIGHT AWAY, & basically hurt him with a right over the top that landed on top of Stewart's head. The fight was effectively over from then, but Stewart showed Heart in getting up & carrying.

The first Holyfield fight - September 1989, I believe, he gave Holyfield a see-saw battle. If he was around today, I'd say he'd be a title holder!

I don't recall Tyson landing anything of significance. But I do think it was fear more than money. I just wont rule out King signing a check.

Watch the fight, Tyson's second punch, a right hand, lands on top of Stewart's head, resulting in the first KD.

The last KD, a left hook lands on Alex's jaw, putting him down for the third & final time!

I saw the fight and the 20 replays. I'm confident I could take all of those shots without going down. They were glancing blows at best. Holyfield and Foreman hit him much harder. Not to mention the uppercuts Moorer was dropping on him.

This was the same as Seldon. Actually, it was worse.