Printable View
yea and he also beat him, Bowe had the chin to take shots from a prime HW Holyfield, Lewis didn't, i think that a prime Holyfield would have been all over him and would smother him with left and right hooks, and stop him a little over the half point of the fightQuote:
Originally Posted by LegendBoxing65
Lewis was a bad fighter when he was unprepared. He always came back to avenge. He would have taken Holyfield more seriously than he did the first time against Rahman and Mccall. Let's not compare Bowe to Lewis either, because we all know Bowe was scared to fight Lewis.
Lets not give Lewis too much credit either, he was outboxed by Ray Mercer and knocked out by McCall and a very mediocre Rahman.Quote:
Originally Posted by lb4lb
He avenged his loss to McCall, by teaming up with McCall's old trainer Emmanuel Steward, (a little fact that I feel is often overlooked when folks talk about the rematch) and outboxing McCall.
He did avenge his loss to Rahman as well, a fighter that I feel he shouldn't have lost to in the first place.
I also felt the second Holyfield fight was a toss up, but that pawing snapless Lewis jab kept distance and kept him winning fights.
But lets be realistic, being prepared for a fight is part of what makes a fighter great and being unprepared for fights is part of what doesn't make a boxer great.
IMO Lewis wasnt very fun too watch but he did have a very solid, effective overhand right and a great uppercut. That jab always bothered me though.
The thing that was nice about Bowe was that he was a big guy who would mix it up on the inside or on the outside. Lewis was an outside fighter period and not as exciting to watch. The problem with Bowe was that I don't think he was committed enough to be in top form every match.
But you're right in that Bowe should have faced Lewis.....I just can't see the best version of Lewis beating the best version of Holyfield though.
Good points. Although I still think Lewis in his prime was better than prime Holyfield, I respect your point of view. They are only 3 years apart, so age may have been a small factor, but not a huge factor when they faced each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by mucho testosterone
All fighters have had some bad outings here and there. I don't think that Holyfield should have went the distance with Michael Moorer and losses or draws against Ruiz is bad at any stage of Holyfield's career, but I still see him as one of the all time greats as well.
:coolclick: Thanks for the conversation.Quote:
Originally Posted by lb4lb
and he would never ever beat Lewis even in his prime ^^
Id have to totally disagree with that, lewis became a better fighter later and was also a big does not rely on speed if you put lewsi in with a 30 year old evander as long as evander fights sMART HE WINS.. hell he was outboxing lewis in the rematch he just coudnt suttain it and his speed was 50 percent what it was.. toney a real good fighter but give me a break a 29 year old holyfield would stop him in 8-9 keep things in perspective guys holy was over 40 or so when they fought, toney would not be able to keep holy off, and evander has better speed
I agree, Holyfield was way too quick for Lewis at one time.Quote:
Originally Posted by pacdog
I think that their ages were close when they fought, but Holyfield hit his prime far before Lewis. The fights with Bowe took alot out of Evander.
The Holyfield that fought Bowe in I or II would have dismantled the best Lewis. The reason why Bowe gave Holyfield such a good fight was that he was mult-dimensional and was willing to scrap with Evander on the inside.
Lewis, even though he beat Bowe in the '88 olympics (a fact that the Lewis supporters like to point out), did not have the inside ability that Bowe did and would not have had too much of an answer for Evander.