BoxRec

Ali lets say between 71-74 V Holyfield between 91-94, who wins and why???
I see it as a very competitive fight with Ali winning a close UD, Holy maybe not powerful enough to really trouble the greatest.......great fight though....

Well because I'm not too sure when either were in their prime, you could argue that the Ali who was striped of his title was the greatest or the one that beat Foreman.....I don't know Evander's prime, but I'm thinking it's the one that beat Douglas and fought Bowe.....so if The Ali of 1966 met the Holyfield of 1990, who would win???

Holyfield would have give the Ali of 71 - 74 a world of trouble.

Ali had lost a little speed by then & his legs were on the verge of going.

I think Ali would have won a very close decision, but he would have to have been on his game or Evander would have been in with a good shout.

The Holyfield of 1990-1993 may have been physically superior to the 95-97 version but some might argue that the later version of Holyfield fought more intelligently and was actually a more formidable opponnent because of his experience.

Good point about Holy being maybe more intelligent as a fighter, experience can be such a distinct advantage. This also applies to Ali, the 71-74 version may not have been as fast with hands or feet, but his extra few yrs and experience made him more of a puzzle, plus I feel Ali was physically stronger from 71 onwards...he looked even more like a Heavy. If you could take the best of both their so called peaks, that would be something...the speed of Ali in 66 with the experience and strength of Ali in 71...same with Holyfield...with this into account Ali is my definite choice....

peak 66 ali wins a near shutout over holyfield IMO, based on styles. i dont think evande matches up well with ali

no way is an after layoff ali better then a pre layoff ali....

ali was always a genious in the ring, it just was more focused on because he really lost alot of his stuff, so he had to depend on his intellegence as a fighter.. ill say it again.. a 66-67 Ali is the closest thing to unbeatable that i know of in boxing.

walshb wrote:Good point about Holy being maybe more intelligent as a fighter, experience can be such a distinct advantage. This also applies to Ali, the 71-74 version may not have been as fast with hands or feet, but his extra few yrs and experience made him more of a puzzle, plus I feel Ali was physically stronger from 71 onwards...he looked even more like a Heavy. If you could take the best of both their so called peaks, that would be something...the speed of Ali in 66 with the experience and strength of Ali in 71...same with Holyfield...with this into account Ali is my definite choice....

Totally agree with your take on Ali's peak being a combination of the two. I think the same can be said of Foreman.

I always laugh at these pre lay off and post lay off comparisons of Ali.

Some of the combinations he threw in Manila would have rocked Holyfield

The Ali in Zaire was never going to lose that fight in a million years


Ali after the Manila fight was never the same.

prior to that Ali would have taken Holy. Yes he would have won a lopsided UD after Zaire but he would have caught Holy with some combos.

Between the first Frazier fight and Zaire, Ali re modelled himself into a more intelligent fighter. Before hand he hand blinding hand & foot speed which would have broke Holy's heart but after Zaire he would have fought a more balanced fight.

So Ali v's Holiyfield pre 1971 Ali to win by KO

After 1974 Ali to win via UD

Holy would have had a great chance against the Ali between 71-74 when the great one was going through this metamorphis.

Holyfield rarely looked good against a strong jabber and his way to neutralize his opponents jab was to get inside. I believe that would have been a mistake on his part.

Ali's ability to brawl is severely underrated imo.
Not many of those who went to war aginst Ali held the distance.
I'm not saying Ali was a great brawler, in fact he's infighting abilities were average at best, but due to his tremendous chin and overall toughness, he almost always came out on top.

I believe Holyfield, lacking the necessary punch to hurt Ali, would come up short against him. After all, it's not like Holyfield wasn't there to be hit in close quarters either, and I believe Ali could take more of Holyfield's punches and still stay effective than vice versa.
My pick would be Ali by decision. Would probably be one hell of a fight too.

-KOKid-

Bad match-up for Holyfield - Ali would have ran and jabbed and Holy was always better if the other guy wanted to stand and mix it up -

Ali's jab and legs would have caused Holyfield real trouble -

Ali by UD (no way does Ali KO Holy as was predicted above).


For Holy to win he'd need to come out fast and get an early lead - Work Ali in the corners and try some rough stuff - Either get Ali lured into standing a trading a little more (based on pride)...or get an early lead in which Ali felt pressured to stand a trade a little more as the fight wore on.

Styles make match-up's and this one works for Ali -

60% Ali by DEC
40% Holy by DEC

[quote="walshb"]Ali lets say between 71-74 V Holyfield between 91-94, who wins and why???
I see it as a very competitive fight with Ali winning a close UD, Holy maybe not powerful enough to really trouble the greatest.......great fight though....[/quote]

Holyfield definitely had the power -and other skills, too: speed, chin, combo punching, footwork/balance, lightning jab, strong willed/tough- to trouble Ali. Anybody that thinks otherwise is in fantasyland. Old Holyfield went 24 rds with a giant boxer/jabber in Lewis, no sweat. Young Holyfield poleaxed a big boxer/jabber in Douglas, no sweat. I could see Holyfield hurting Ali before I could see Ali (now THERE was a guy who didn't have much power, for his size) hurting Holyfield.

Ali by controversial decision (a lot of holding his opponent behind the head). Holyfield wins the rematch.

Tsk-tsk. Some of you people... Holyfield was a tiger in '90-'91 (surely, WITHOUT A DOUBT, he would have KOed Tyson in spectacular fashion in '91, for example).

Holyfield's victories in 1990-1991 don't seem particularly significant when compared with his wins in other years. What was so special about this version?

See Holyfield-Douglas, cojimar.

Well, for one thing the old-timer boxing writers of that time were so enamoured of Tyson that they cast dispersions, literally, upon Holyfield, Tyson's next closest rival ("but still no match"). Those mistruths linger to this day. Uhm, Holyfield of '90 rips Tyson a new ass and takes his heart...much easier than he did in '97 (you know, when Evander was 34 yrs old, and a shell of himself, skill-wise, after all the wars...although this is Holyfield we're talking about: he still had some skills left).

He'd gladly swim in deep waters with Ali. The longer the fight goes on the more sucseptable (sp?) Ali is to a knock-down.

Professor X wrote:

walshb wrote:Ali lets say between 71-74 V Holyfield between 91-94, who wins and why???
I see it as a very competitive fight with Ali winning a close UD, Holy maybe not powerful enough to really trouble the greatest.......great fight though....

Holyfield definitely had the power -and other skills, too: speed, chin, combo punching, footwork/balance, lightning jab, strong willed/tough- to trouble Ali. Anybody that thinks otherwise is in fantasyland. Old Holyfield went 24 rds with a giant boxer/jabber in Lewis, no sweat. Young Holyfield poleaxed a big boxer/jabber in Douglas, no sweat. I could see Holyfield hurting Ali before I could see Ali (now THERE was a guy who didn't have much power, for his size) hurting Holyfield.

Ali by controversial decision (a lot of holding his opponent behind the head). Holyfield wins the rematch.

Tsk-tsk. Some of you people... Holyfield was a tiger in '90-'91 (surely, WITHOUT A DOUBT, he would have KOed Tyson in spectacular fashion in '91, for example).

Correct without a doubt here - As I said above sytles make fights...as well as "fighers" make fights as well -

Holyfield owns Tyson - Be it in 1990 or when then fought in 1996 - Tyson was made to order for Holyfield -

Which is exactly why Holyfield would have problems with Ali - It is just a bad styles match-up for Holyfield - (though I could definitely see him winning a close dec)

Side Note: The old tire falsehood about Tyson in 1990 (or from 86-90) that he had more head movement, etc, etc,......is all BS - Go watch his old fights....he walks into plenty of shots from bums like Ferguson, Berbick, etc, etc -

Tyson was always "there to hit"...if you had the stones (and chin) to stand in there and fight with him......Which is the only way to beat him.

Side Note 2: - A prime Tyson KO's Lennox - Lennox in 2001 did without a doubt fight a shell of Tyson in 96 or 90 - Lennox would try and box from the outside and stay away early...giving too much respect to a prime Tyson......Tyson eats those guys alive.

Everyone seems to be focusing on the wrong Holyfield and the wrong Ali. Lets ask the question everyone is itching to know the answer to: Who wins between '03-04 Holyfield and '80-'81 Ali?

Here are my picks: '03-04 Holyfield wins a close fifteen-round decision over Ali of '80 (Holmes fight). Punch stats: 23 out of 76 for Holyfield (30%), 15 out of 25 for Ali (60%). Both fighters think about quitting after the 2nd round, but tough it out like true warriors.

In the rematch, '81 Ali (Berbick fight) picks up the pace and wins in a terrifically close fifteen-round decision over '03-04 Holyfield. Punch stats for the rematch: 28 out of 63 for Ali (44%), 21 out of 72 for Holyfield (29%). Holyfield excuses his defeat afterwards, complaining that he suffered from hemorrhoids during training camp.

matching Holyfield with ali, is just unfair. u cant compare the two. ali would have massacred holyfield.

[quote="meade95"][quote="Professor X"][quote="walshb"]Ali lets say between 71-74 V Holyfield between 91-94, who wins and why???
I see it as a very competitive fight with Ali winning a close UD, Holy maybe not powerful enough to really trouble the greatest.......great fight though....[/quote]

Holyfield definitely had the power -and other skills, too: speed, chin, combo punching, footwork/balance, lightning jab, strong willed/tough- to trouble Ali. Anybody that thinks otherwise is in fantasyland. Old Holyfield went 24 rds with a giant boxer/jabber in Lewis, no sweat. Young Holyfield poleaxed a big boxer/jabber in Douglas, no sweat. I could see Holyfield hurting Ali before I could see Ali (now THERE was a guy who didn't have much power, for his size) hurting Holyfield.

Ali by controversial decision (a lot of holding his opponent behind the head). Holyfield wins the rematch.

Tsk-tsk. Some of you people... Holyfield was a tiger in '90-'91 (surely, WITHOUT A DOUBT, he would have KOed Tyson in spectacular fashion in '91, for example).[/quote]


Correct without a doubt here - As I said above sytles make fights...as well as "fighers" make fights as well -

Holyfield owns Tyson - Be it in 1990 or when then fought in 1996 - Tyson was made to order for Holyfield -

Which is exactly why Holyfield would have problems with Ali - It is just a bad styles match-up for Holyfield - (though I could definitely see him winning a close dec)

Side Note: The old tire falsehood about Tyson in 1990 (or from 86-90) that he had more head movement, etc, etc,......is all BS - Go watch his old fights....he walks into plenty of shots from bums like Ferguson, Berbick, etc, etc -

Tyson was always "there to hit"...if you had the stones (and chin) to stand in there and fight with him......Which is the only way to beat him.

Side Note 2: - A prime Tyson KO's Lennox - Lennox in 2001 did without a doubt fight a shell of Tyson in 96 or 90 - Lennox would try and box from the outside and stay away early...giving too much respect to a prime Tyson......Tyson eats those guys alive.[/quote]

That's why I mentioned Lewis and Douglas (tall boxers with good jabs...and I could mention Mercer). Holyfield didn't necessarily have problems with jabbers. As a matter of fact, when Holyfield wasn't pressing the action, and he decided to jab, he gave lessons on the jab. Holyfield faced every style (including a young, grappling Ruiz when he was 38 yrs old) a heavyweight possibly could and did quite well for himself.

peak tyson KO 2 holyfield

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:peak tyson KO 2 holyfield

Peak Tyson L 12 Holyfield.

In the fight with Holyfield Douglas entered the ring way above his best fighting weight. He clearly did not train for the fight like he did against Tyson. Holyfield might have had a far more difficult time with a Douglas in good physical condition who was interested in winning.

Rory McCloskey wrote:matching Holyfield with ali, is just unfair. u cant compare the two. ali would have massacred holyfield.

No way bud - While I'll admit Ali gives Holy style match up problems (as Ali skills would for anyone) to suggest Ali massacres Holy only shows you aren't willing to be intellectually honest and you just have too much smoke about Ali (and probably most 70's rated HW's).

Holy's handspeed, inside fighting, combination punching, chin, desire and heart and overall skill could all propel Holy to a DEC victory over Ali (on any given night).

peak ali wide 15 unanimous


70s ali, ali by close decision, could go either way.




but no way does holyfield beat a peak ali

You asked and I told you, Cojimar. Holyfield crushed his, Douglas', fuckin' face in. No excuses. Got it? Old Holyfield crushed Tyson's forehead permanently out of place. No excuses. Got it?

Now, of course, Holyfield gave Larry Holmes a grade A lesson in the jab. That fight was a jab contest, won unanimously by Holyfield (remember, it bored you old-timers to death because it wasn't something like Tyson vs some bitch, non-heavyweight, like Spinks). That's exhibit A...a scientific fact. Holyfield could deal with Ali's jab...and he might double or tripple it up right back on him (not that any of you old-timers would notice it anyway...you wouldn't...Holyfield is your blind spot...Tyson was your latter day cause, is how backwards you nearly all are).

So this is supposed to be the Holyfield that beat Douglas vs the Ali that beat Foreman thread? Heh-heh. If it were so, I would definitely put my money on Holyfield. No question about it. Kinda' like I put my money on Old Holyfield over Tyson in '96. You know, like, I know you don't believe it, but tough shit, old-timers. I don't bet loosely.

Professor X wrote:You asked and I told you, Cojimar. Holyfield crushed his, Douglas', fuckin' face in. No excuses. Got it? Old Holyfield crushed Tyson's forehead permanently out of place. No excuses. Got it?

Now, of course, Holyfield gave Larry Holmes a grade A lesson in the jab. That fight was a jab contest, won unanimously by Holyfield (remember, it bored you old-timers to death because it wasn't something like Tyson vs some bitch, non-heavyweight, like Spinks). That's exhibit A...a scientific fact. Holyfield could deal with Ali's jab...and he might double or tripple it up right back on him (not that any of you old-timers would notice it anyway...you wouldn't...Holyfield is your blind spot...Tyson was your latter day cause, is how backwards you nearly all are).

So this is supposed to be the Holyfield that beat Douglas vs the Ali that beat Foreman thread? Heh-heh. If it were so, I would definitely put my money on Holyfield. No question about it. Kinda' like I put my money on Old Holyfield over Tyson in '96. You know, like, I know you don't believe it, but tough shit, old-timers. I don't bet loosely.

If the fight took place next month, I think Holyfield would KO Ali in one round, two rounds tops.

Don't get so worked up over all of this! It is all a guessing game. If someone picks Ali, don't say, "you are stupid and I hope you die." Just relax and state your opinion. People hate inconsiderate posters more than anything else.