Who Was The Top Heavyweight Of The 90's?

Obviously inspired by Slystaff's thread, this is an open-debate as well, even though it was a significantly better period for the division than the 1980's.

Who's got your vote? I'd say this boils down to two men --- Holyfield & Lewis --- but to be fair, I will include an, 'Other - Specify' vote, too, if anyone feels the need to press someone else's case home.

As with Holmes & Tyson, I think the answer is pretty open-ended, here. I could plumb for either man in a prime, head-to-head battle, & their achievements are pretty close.

I gave Holmes a small edge head-to-head, & Tyson a tight advantage on achievements. Similarly, I slightly favour the Holyfield of his pomp to narrowly decision Lewis, but feel Lewis was overall the more accomplished man at Heavyweight. Both categories are close, but I'm a little more confident in Lewis' achievements than I am in Holyfield beating him, so...

First vote, Lewis.

 

Lewis. Beat all that was put in front of him. Beat the guys he lost to by beating and outclassing them in each re-match to also show he was a true champion.

 

Bowe ahead of Holyfield in the 90's.

 

Lennox Lewis LAPPED the Field in the 90's...No Other Heavyweight was Close....



REED:mj:

 

Head to Head, Sure...NOT So Sure about Resume & Accomplishments Though...



REED:kidcool:

 

Lennox for me. Beat all the guys he faced. Nobody else did that.

Our last great heavyweight.

 

Lennox, quite clearly

 

I notice we have three votes for Holyfield, but no one wants to present a case for him in-writing?

Personally, I don't see this as wide for Lewis as some of you. Holyfield is competitive in accolades, IMO, & as I say, I would slightly favour him head-to-head.

 

How many heavyweights in history have been the class of two decades, like Lewis?

 

I voted for Holyfield. I can accept an argument for Lennox Lewis but Evander was the Heavyweight of the 90s let's be honest....although I always thought that lennox was the better fighter at heavyweight.

IMO, Lennox's career defining wins ocurred at the turn of the new millenium...Grant, Rahman, Tyson, Vitali Klit. Again...IMO.

Now of course he did beat Holyfield in the 90s..but that was at the end of Evander's peak..and although Lewis deserved the first fight it was ruled a draw..and it was a boring shitty fight... and although he actually won the 2nd fight...it looked to be a draw. Neither fight was career defining for Lennox.

Of Course Lennox beat Ruddock in the 90s...and that was VERY IMPRESSIVE...but it wasn't for a title, and he looked rather average in his next few fights with Tucker, Bruno, McCall etc. Still..he had a good stretch in the late 90s with Mercer (CLOSE fight), McCall 2, Golota and Briggs (Linear championship)...and that's why it's a good debate.


EVANDER "THE REAL DEAL" HOLYFIELD (I'm a huge fan) however.....

Won the undisputed title from the guy who "busted" Tyson...in impressive fashion. Had the high profile fights with Foreman and Bowe. Beat Bowe in the rematch to become only the third man (up to that point) to regain the Linear (and TRUE) title. He beat Tyson twice in the biggest heavyweight fights of the decade. And he beat Moorer also. He had also beaten Mercer.

For me....Commander Vander's exploits DEFINED the Heavyweight division in the 90s. Lennox Lewis wasn't the big name until the turn of the millenium.

It's a good debate and I see arguments for either side, but gimme The Real Deal. It was HIS decade.

 

Bullshit.

 

Ali. (60s and 70s)

 

Good company.

 

There was Louis, in the 30's & 40's. Ali has the 60's & 70's locked up. The case could be made for Jeffries during the 90's & 00's. You could argue Dempsey earned the teens, in addition to sewing up the 20's uncontested.

Lewis, though, doesn't have the body of work (for mine) to be the best of the 00's. Certainly, he was better as a fighter than anyone who has come since, but his actual achievements for the decade have fallen by the wayside, IMO.

 

Still...I don't see Lewis as THE CLASS of the 90s.

Ali was the UNDISPUTED ruler of two decades. Lewis shared the 90s with Evander, Bowe and Tyson...in terms of impact and achievements.

Lewis was the class of the 00s


Ali, however, ruled the 70s...no doubt. Everything in the division in the 70s worth talking about involved Ali. Lennox cannot say that about the 90s. The Holy-Bowe trilogy had huge impact...Lennox not involved. Holy-Tyson fights..Lewis not involved. Tyson's comeback and regaining of two titles. Lewis not involved. Bowe attempting to bring glory to the WBO the way Holmes did it for the IBF.....Lewis not involved.

Lewis SHARED the glory in the 90s...regardless of how we want to revise history as some sort of unconscious makeup for him being underrated earlier in his career.

Ali had all the glory in the 60s AND the 70s.

 

holyfield. lewis wasn't the man until he fought holyfield and didn't exactly impress anyone in the rematch.

 

holyfield. ill never get over lewis s unwillingness to engage

 

Holyfield was on the short end of rivalries with both Bowe and Lewis (1-2 to Bowe, 0-1-1 to Lewis), and only split his head-to-head with Moorer (1-1).

Hard for me to make him the division's #1 when he wasn't even clearly that against three of his best opponents in the decade.

Talk all you want about Holyfield nearing the end when he fought Lewis, but don't then give him more credit for beating Tyson twice...Holyfield was a more proven division #1 at the time of the Lewis fight than Tyson was when Holyfield beat him (when, in fact, he was anything but the clear #1 in the division).

And it is amazing how much Holyfield benefits by the fact that he priced himself out of a Lewis fight after he beat Moorer in the rematch and Lewis beat Golota in 1997, letting that fight sit for a year and a half while he wasted time with Akinwande and Bean.

 

Clever. The fact remains, however, that Holyfield did beat Bowe and Moorer in rematches.

We can do many clever things with statistics. Consider:

Head to head...Sugar Ray Robinson was on the short end of rivalries with Fulmer (1-2-1), Paul Pender (0-2), and only split in his Head-to-Head with Basilio and Turpin (1-1).

Considering that Fulmer stopped Basilio twice and won the head to head with Robinson, should we then start considering Fulmer a better Middleweight than Robinson?

What Statistics can conceal is vital.

Holyfield knocked out Buster Douglas who was the man that took away a prime Tyson's "0"...making him the undisputed undefeated heavyweight champion. Evander beat Foreman who would go on to win the Linear title himself a few years later. Evander beat Bowe in the rematch and because of sickness..couldn't finish Bowe off in the 3rd fight when he had Riddick completely out on his feet after a hard knock down. Holyfield beat Tyson twice...after Tyson regained two versions of the Heavyweight crown and was considered by every magazine as the Top Heavyweight at that time. Holyfield later got revenge on Moorer by stopping him...again in a high profile fight.

In the meantime Lennox had been knocked out in two rounds by McCall, struggled with Bruno and Mercer and looked average against a couple other no name fighters.

 

Couldn't help but notice you mentioned a lot of names that aren't Lennox Lewis as you talk about Holyfield's resume.

But it's nice to know Evan Fields gets a pass in the Bowe rubber match due to sickness.

 

I wouldn't; he lost to Lewis twice despite what Eugenia Williams said.

 

holyfield lost the first fight to lewis and won the rematch.

 

LOL

 

Neil, please

 

you chaps hate it. but the truth is, if lewis wouldve received his rightful victory in their first bout, there would have been zero uproar or cries of robbery in the rematch had holyfield gotten the decision. king of course wouldve lost out on millions of dollars if he wasnt able to promote the rematch.

 

Those aren't the same thing...neither, of course, is accurate.

 

:atu: and I'll never get over Holyfield's interview after the Tyson fight

 

If Lewis hadn't beaten Holyfield so decisively and so dominantly in the first fight, there would've been no disputing Lewis's win in the second fight. But the fact of the matter is, Holyfield seemingly fought better in the second fight and consequently, got more credit than he deserved for the performance based on this. It's similar to judges who often give rounds to fighters simply because they did better than in previous rounds that they lost decisively. I say Holyfield "seemingly" fought better because in my opinion it had more to do with Lewis changing his style up to please the fans and crooked judges than anything Holyfield changed from the first fight.

 

Lewis all fucking day twats

 

I don't understand the point you're making here. Sorry for being slow.