Some Knowledge For That A**!!

[El Gamo]

Holyfield is a blown up cruiser. He didn't belong in the heavy's to begin with and he fought the best of his era, beat most of them, or put on a hell of a fight. If you remember he was diagnosed with a defective heart valve. This was during the Moorer fight and Bowe 3rd fight. Somehow it was healed prior to the Tyson fight and my opinion all along was that Holyfield should have retired after that fight.

Sadly he is still fighting and has been way past his best. The list of fighters he lost to are almost all former champions. These were pretty much all championship fights. Get real. Because he didn't dodge fighters and have matchmakers put him in with only fighters to pad his record, he's got losses. I hate to break it too you but if every fighter fought the highest competetion they would have multiple losses on their records. It's life. No one is really that dominate over another person. MMA is much more realistic in matchups than boxing. All the champs have multiple losses. It's because they fight stiffer competetion more often.

Holyfield is an all time great because of who he's fought, how he fought, and the accomplishments of his career. In addition he hasn't allowed losses to get him down. How many fighters disappear after a loss? Most writers say they should retire whenever they lose. While I think Holyfield should retire, he is amazing in his perserverance.

CC,an excellent post. The only think I'll ask is,I think Frozensolid is saying that Evander is not an ATG HW(Right Frozen?) You've said he's an atll time great,but is he one at HW? Excellent analogy with MMA,I really liked that point.

[frozensolid_702]

Holyfield is a blown up cruiser. He didn't belong in the heavy's to begin with and he fought the best of his era, beat most of them, or put on a hell of a fight. If you remember he was diagnosed with a defective heart valve. This was during the Moorer fight and Bowe 3rd fight. Somehow it was healed prior to the Tyson fight and my opinion all along was that Holyfield should have retired after that fight.

Sadly he is still fighting and has been way past his best. The list of fighters he lost to are almost all former champions. These were pretty much all championship fights. Get real. Because he didn't dodge fighters and have matchmakers put him in with only fighters to pad his record, he's got losses. I hate to break it too you but if every fighter fought the highest competetion they would have multiple losses on their records. It's life. No one is really that dominate over another person. MMA is much more realistic in matchups than boxing. All the champs have multiple losses. It's because they fight stiffer competetion more often.

Holyfield is an all time great because of who he's fought, how he fought, and the accomplishments of his career. In addition he hasn't allowed losses to get him down. How many fighters disappear after a loss? Most writers say they should retire whenever they lose. While I think Holyfield should retire, he is amazing in his perserverance.

CC,an excellent post. The only think I'll ask is,I think Frozensolid is saying that Evander is not an ATG HW(Right Frozen?) You've said he's an atll time great,but is he one at HW? Excellent analogy with MMA,I really liked that point.

I've never denied that Holyfield is one of the best (maybe the best) cruiserweights of all time, but what thbis debate is about, is people that consider Holyfield an all-time great heavyweight. Being an all time great heavyweight is a hell of a lot more monumental than being an all time great cruiser weight.

I think I've done a fine job in making my case so far

[ICB]

So you're saying that Foreman should win past the age of 40 while it's acceptable for Holyfield to lose past the age of 40 because "age treats men differently,"??

What are you talking about ?? i said Foreman made some improvements in his later career which he did and that age treats people different to others thats obvisious i didn't say Foreman should win past the age of 40 but he was better fighter than what Holyfield was at 40.



You are really reaching, now.

I am ?? actually you put words into my mouth which i didn't say at all.


It's Holyfield's own fault for not retiring when he should have. If he wants to continue fighting until he's 60 years old and he finishes with 30 losses then that's on him.

Did i say it wasn't his fault ?? all im saying is that he was well past it when he lost to the likes of Donald ect and you keep bringing up those loses trying to discredit Holyfield alot of fighters lose past there prime.

[Kev]

Holyfield is a blown up cruiser. He didn't belong in the heavy's to begin with and he fought the best of his era, beat most of them, or put on a hell of a fight. If you remember he was diagnosed with a defective heart valve. This was during the Moorer fight and Bowe 3rd fight. Somehow it was healed prior to the Tyson fight and my opinion all along was that Holyfield should have retired after that fight.

Sadly he is still fighting and has been way past his best. The list of fighters he lost to are almost all former champions. These were pretty much all championship fights. Get real. Because he didn't dodge fighters and have matchmakers put him in with only fighters to pad his record, he's got losses. I hate to break it too you but if every fighter fought the highest competetion they would have multiple losses on their records. It's life. No one is really that dominate over another person. MMA is much more realistic in matchups than boxing. All the champs have multiple losses. It's because they fight stiffer competetion more often.

Holyfield is an all time great because of who he's fought, how he fought, and the accomplishments of his career. In addition he hasn't allowed losses to get him down. How many fighters disappear after a loss? Most writers say they should retire whenever they lose. While I think Holyfield should retire, he is amazing in his perserverance.

CC,an excellent post. The only think I'll ask is,I think Frozensolid is saying that Evander is not an ATG HW(Right Frozen?) You've said he's an atll time great,but is he one at HW? Excellent analogy with MMA,I really liked that point.

I've never denied that Holyfield is one of the best (maybe the best) cruiserweights of all time, but what thbis debate is about, is people that consider Holyfield an all-time great heavyweight. Being an all time great heavyweight is a hell of a lot more monumental than being an all time great cruiser weight.

I think I've done a fine job in making my case so far

Holyfield IS an all time great at heavyweight, he's the ONLY 4 time heavyweight champ, he beat Mike Tyson twice, had wins over Larry Holmes and George Foreman and had a great trilogy with Riddick Bowe.

He has fought EVERY single great heavyweight that was available for him to fight, Holmes, Foreman, Tyson, Bowe, Lewis who else aside from the likes of Ali, Frazier and Foreman can say that?

Frazier got annihilated twice by Foreman I guess he's not great either?

Ali fought the best and had losses to Norton and Frazier and then went on too long and lost to the like of Trevor Berbick and Leon Spinks, is he not great either?

I feel it's pointless even to enter into a discussion with you as you clearly have the cranial capacity of a hedgehog but I'm reminding myself that we should see the person and not the disability.

[DaxxKahn]

To say a 4 time HW champion of the world who was almost always undersized and outgunned is not an all time great of his division is something I can not even find merit in debating....

[frozensolid_702]

To say a 4 time HW champion of the world who was almost always undersized and outgunned is not an all time great of his division is something I can not even find merit in debating....

Do you consider the 9 guys that beat him all time greats?

[Kev]

To say a 4 time HW champion of the world who was almost always undersized and outgunned is not an all time great of his division is something I can not even find merit in debating....

Do you consider the 9 guys that beat him all time greats?

Do you consider your 9 brain cells to constitue a high IQ?

[frozensolid_702]

Holyfield is a blown up cruiser. He didn't belong in the heavy's to begin with and he fought the best of his era, beat most of them, or put on a hell of a fight. If you remember he was diagnosed with a defective heart valve. This was during the Moorer fight and Bowe 3rd fight. Somehow it was healed prior to the Tyson fight and my opinion all along was that Holyfield should have retired after that fight.

Sadly he is still fighting and has been way past his best. The list of fighters he lost to are almost all former champions. These were pretty much all championship fights. Get real. Because he didn't dodge fighters and have matchmakers put him in with only fighters to pad his record, he's got losses. I hate to break it too you but if every fighter fought the highest competetion they would have multiple losses on their records. It's life. No one is really that dominate over another person. MMA is much more realistic in matchups than boxing. All the champs have multiple losses. It's because they fight stiffer competetion more often.

Holyfield is an all time great because of who he's fought, how he fought, and the accomplishments of his career. In addition he hasn't allowed losses to get him down. How many fighters disappear after a loss? Most writers say they should retire whenever they lose. While I think Holyfield should retire, he is amazing in his perserverance.

CC,an excellent post. The only think I'll ask is,I think Frozensolid is saying that Evander is not an ATG HW(Right Frozen?) You've said he's an atll time great,but is he one at HW? Excellent analogy with MMA,I really liked that point.

I've never denied that Holyfield is one of the best (maybe the best) cruiserweights of all time, but what thbis debate is about, is people that consider Holyfield an all-time great heavyweight. Being an all time great heavyweight is a hell of a lot more monumental than being an all time great cruiser weight.

I think I've done a fine job in making my case so far

Holyfield IS an all time great at heavyweight, he's the ONLY 4 time heavyweight champ, he beat Mike Tyson twice, had wins over Larry Holmes and George Foreman and had a great trilogy with Riddick Bowe.

He has fought EVERY single great heavyweight that was available for him to fight, Holmes, Foreman, Tyson, Bowe, Lewis who else aside from the likes of Ali, Frazier and Foreman can say that?

Frazier got annihilated twice by Foreman I guess he's not great either?

Ali fought the best and had losses to Norton and Frazier and then went on too long and lost to the like of Trevor Berbick and Leon Spinks, is he not great either?

I feel it's pointless even to enter into a discussion with you as you clearly have the cranial capacity of a hedgehog but I'm reminding myself that we should see the person and not the disability.

The only reason that he was a 4 time champ is because he couldn't defend a title to save his life.

Let me say this again, because it's pretty obvious that you didn't read the thread before you posted because you statement reeks of ignorance.



24 wins
9 losses
2 draws

He lost 9 fucking times, many of them weren't very good fighters.

9 times!


He never had any "prime," as he would constantly lose to B and C level fighters

And drop your ridiculous Holyfield/Ali comparison, so you can save yourself from further foolishness.













In the future, please read thread before commenting because it just makes you sound like a jackass when you don't.

[DaxxKahn]

To say a 4 time HW champion of the world who was almost always undersized and outgunned is not an all time great of his division is something I can not even find merit in debating....

Do you consider the 9 guys that beat him all time greats?

One has nothing to do with the other when it comes to an entire acreer...Thats like saying Ray Robinson is not one of the P4P top 2 greatest of all time because he lost to a few nobodies towards the end.....

You have to look at the whole over all picture and Evander is a top 10 alltime HW period......

Going with your train of thought we might as well take Marciano off the top 10 list because he beat a bunch of former greats on the downslide....

[Kev]

He lost 9 times because unlike virtually every other modern fighter he fought the best.

Like mnay great fighters the ringwars he had with the best fighters of his era took a lot out of him and he subsequently lost to fighters who he would have licked in his prime.

There are many great fights with as many losses as Holyfield, Jack Johnson lost 14 times, guys like Holmes, Foreman, Tyson, Ali all lost 5,6 or 7 times.

Ray Robinson lost 19 and drew six, you want to argue he's not great.

I know we're not talking MMA here but it's valid in as much as the reigning heavyweight champ Randy Couture's record is something like 17-8 yet he's regarded as a legend in the sport, one of the best ever.


Trying to argue someone isn't great based purely on their statistical record shows an inability to evaluate and assess matters.

You are making a fool of yourself. Have we had a single person yet who agrees with you? Do ANY of the great boxing writers and experts agree with you?

Do you think you are so clever because you managed to type boxrec into google and counted his losses up to 9?

I bet your mummy still gives you a treat every time you remember to wash your hands after using your potty and wiping your own bum

[bcollins]

For those that want to continue the argument of Evander Holyfield being an all time great heavyweight........................

Do you know what Holyfield's record as a HEAVYWEIGHT is??
24 wins
9 losses (that's not a type-o, he really does have 9 losses )
2 draws

Wow! 24-9-2

Has there ever been a more overrated fighter in the history of boxing??
Nope.

Hail Sultan!

Wow.

So let me get this straight. Your "debate" is essentially a critique of Holyfield's accomplishments in the ring.

Umm...when was the last time you won a HW title again? Or stepped in the ring with some of these "lesser" fighters you're babbling about?

People who are critical of someone else's accomplishments are usually those who have none of their own.

You should look to yourself before you start tearing into someone else.

[JohnnyKickAss]

The thing is that the way you argue is moronic...cause that way there are no all time great heavyweights
(and not just heavyweights...)at all either they lost to some no names or they didn't fight any known opposition(or maybe known names,but shot at this point or injured or whatever)...

Its just the usual hater talk...



BTW of course is Arturo Gatti an all time great...

[frozensolid_702]

He lost 9 times because unlike virtually every other modern fighter he fought the best.

Like mnay great fighters the ringwars he had with the best fighters of his era took a lot out of him and he subsequently lost to fighters who he would have licked in his prime.

There are many great fights with as many losses as Holyfield, Jack Johnson lost 14 times, guys like Holmes, Foreman, Tyson, Ali all lost 5,6 or 7 times.

Ray Robinson lost 19 and drew six, you want to argue he's not great.

I know we're not talking MMA here but it's valid in as much as the reigning heavyweight champ Randy Couture's record is something like 17-8 yet he's regarded as a legend in the sport, one of the best ever.


Trying to argue someone isn't great based purely on their statistical record shows an inability to evaluate and assess matters.

You are making a fool of yourself. Have we had a single person yet who agrees with you? Do ANY of the great boxing writers and experts agree with you?

Do you think you are so clever because you managed to type boxrec into google and counted his losses up to 9?

I bet your mummy still gives you a treat every time you remember to wash your hands after using your potty and wiping your own bum

My argument with Holyfield lies in him losing so many times to fighters who were hardly great. Save your ridiculous MMA comparisons for the MMA board. They are two completely different sports where somebody quits 90% of the time.

If Holyfield was so great, fights with guys like John Ruiz, Chris Byrd, and Michael Moorer would have had much different outcomes.

Answer this question dipshit............


At what point in Evander Holyfields illustrious career (as a heavyweight) did he consistently perform like the all time great that you claim that he is??





There isn't too much of a difference in the careers of Holyfield and Gatti

[JohnnyKickAss]

...

There isn't too much of a difference in the careers of Holyfield and Gatti

Hmmm... Gatti wasn't 4time heavyweight champion,though he could have done it if he tried...
All hail Gatti...

Hey frozen...,
just to know,who in you opinion was/is an all time great heavyweight...?!?

...

[Kev]

He lost 9 times because unlike virtually every other modern fighter he fought the best.

Like mnay great fighters the ringwars he had with the best fighters of his era took a lot out of him and he subsequently lost to fighters who he would have licked in his prime.

There are many great fights with as many losses as Holyfield, Jack Johnson lost 14 times, guys like Holmes, Foreman, Tyson, Ali all lost 5,6 or 7 times.

Ray Robinson lost 19 and drew six, you want to argue he's not great.

I know we're not talking MMA here but it's valid in as much as the reigning heavyweight champ Randy Couture's record is something like 17-8 yet he's regarded as a legend in the sport, one of the best ever.


Trying to argue someone isn't great based purely on their statistical record shows an inability to evaluate and assess matters.

You are making a fool of yourself. Have we had a single person yet who agrees with you? Do ANY of the great boxing writers and experts agree with you?

Do you think you are so clever because you managed to type boxrec into google and counted his losses up to 9?

I bet your mummy still gives you a treat every time you remember to wash your hands after using your potty and wiping your own bum

My argument with Holyfield lies in him losing so many times to fighters who were hardly great. Save your ridiculous MMA comparisons for the MMA board. They are two completely different sports where somebody quits 90% of the time.

If Holyfield was so great, fights with guys like John Ruiz, Chris Byrd, and Michael Moorer would have had much different outcomes.

Answer this question dipshit............


At what point in Evander Holyfields illustrious career (as a heavyweight) did he consistently perform like the all time great that you claim that he is??





There isn't too much of a difference in the careers of Holyfield and Gatti

When Holyfield fought the best names in the heavyweight division he was very competitive, Tyson 2-0 wins over Foreman and Holmes, 1-2 with Bowe 0-1-1 with Lewis.

Those names are the heavy equivalents of ooh lets say Julios Cesar Chavez, Pernell Whittaker, Oscar De La Hoya, Felix Trinidad and Shane Mosely.

Now if Gatti in 9 fights spread out between those 5 went 5-1-3 then you would have a point.

Of course though Gatti's career never even approached that. The one guy who did though in the welter weight division would be Oscar De La Hoya, a first ballet shoe in for the Hall of the Fame, the only 6 weight world champ in the history of the sport and one of the best boxers of the past 10 years.

But I doubt you consider him any good either