Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag: Holmes & Holyfield, Tszyu's Cut, Crawford's Future And The Perfect Fighting Machine

[BoxingUpdates]

The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards giving his thoughts on the legacies of Holmes and Holyfield, Tim Tszyu's cut, Crawford's next steps, and creating a perfect fighter.
[Click Here To Read More]

[Mark Elding]

Excellent exchange of comments re. Holmes and Holyfield. I’ve always rated Evander higher. Larry did have way too many misses. I thought he edged Witherspoon but just a touch more seasoning and Tim could have legitimately taken that fight. He calmly took away so many of Holmes’ best tools but just wasn’t busy enough. I agree with Bread that Carl Williams should have got the decision over Larry. Even in a prime head to head I like Holyfield, who was unmotivated and flat when he fought the old Larry for real. Far worse fighters than Evander really got to Holmes, even in his prime - Weaver, Snipes, Shavers was as poor a finisher as he was great with one shot.

[wrecksracer]

I like Holyfield, but Evan Fields grew into the Heavyweight division in a suspicious manner. Everybody knows he had "help." As much as I enjoyed watching him fight, it's hard to place him in a historical context.

[Mark Elding]

Not sure body shots is a narrow enough category for discussion. That’s like having head shots as just one category. McCallum countered to the body better than anyone, particularly with that right uppercut. Chavez had the best left hook to the body. Floyd employed the best body jab. Duran was probably the best combination puncher to the body, though I also love prime Lomachenko for that one.

[Oregonian]

Not sure body shots is a narrow enough category for discussion. That’s like having head shots as just one category. McCallum countered to the body better than anyone, particularly with that right uppercut. Chavez had the best left hook to the body. Floyd employed the best body jab. Duran was probably the best combination puncher to the body, though I also love prime Lomachenko for that one.

————
Truer words have never been spoken

[Clegg]

I don't disagree with people praising his skills because he was a great boxer, but Holmes has a slightly overrated resume imo. People often say Spinks II was a robbery (fair enough) but less often mention the times that judges were kind to him. He also seems to be forgiven for vacating belts to avoid opponents in a way that virtually nobody else is.

[Theshotyoudontsee]

There almost needs to be a "greatest dirty fighter" category, seperate from the greatest fighter.

Holyfield and Hopkins both come to mind as all star dirty as hell fighters. Andre Ward up there. And the argument is, well, they did what they had to do, it's a fight not a game of tag, etc. And all fighters do dirty stuff. Etc etc.

But when the talk turns to "all time greats", there needs to be some kind of dividing line. Holyfield was tough as hell. Yeah he was a good fighter. He also excelled at butting and dirty **** to nullify his size differential.

Compared to a guy like prime Holmes or prime Tyson, Holyfield was not as good IMO, because Hoylfield was clinching, butting, holding, etc, in order to win. All fighters at times do. But Holyfield, Hopkins, Ward.....these guys relied on it and beat better fighters employing dirty tactics. Tyson repeatedly said he bit Evander out of frustration because Holyfield was fighting so dirty. Some people praise that type of fighter. Not me.

Not fun to watch.

[Mark Elding]

There almost needs to be a "greatest dirty fighter" category, seperate from the greatest fighter.

Holyfield and Hopkins both come to mind as all star dirty as hell fighters. Andre Ward up there. And the argument is, well, they did what they had to do, it's a fight not a game of tag, etc. And all fighters do dirty stuff. Etc etc.

But when the talk turns to "all time greats", there needs to be some kind of dividing line. Holyfield was tough as hell. Yeah he was a good fighter. He also excelled at butting and dirty **** to nullify his size differential.

Compared to a guy like prime Holmes or prime Tyson, Holyfield was not as good IMO, because Hoylfield was clinching, butting, holding, etc, in order to win. All fighters at times do. But Holyfield, Hopkins, Ward.....these guys relied on it and beat better fighters employing dirty tactics. Tyson repeatedly said he bit Evander out of frustration because Holyfield was fighting so dirty. Some people praise that type of fighter. Not me.

Not fun to watch.

Fair comments about Holyfield’s tactical fouling, and for calling out Hopkins and Ward for the same, but I’m not sure Holmes and Tyson deserve holding up as comparable examples of rule compliance. Larry in particular was very adept at thumbing with his jabbing hand, something only the most observant referees ever called him out on.

[Clegg]

You can see why Tyson was frustrated...

[THC]

I'd put Loma with the fastest footwork.

Holyfield's accomplishments, I would respect more than Holmes', but like another poster mentioned, it's also tainted by Evan Fields.

Guys who abuse refs not penalizing fouls, e.g. Hopkins, Ward, Camacho. Cheating because you can, that's a big turn off for me.