I thought that Holyfield won.I think Holy clearly lost first fight, but that Lewis clearly lost rematch(although not as much as Holyfield lost in first fight)-you dig.Who do you think won? Later brother brolog.

I thought that Holyfield won.I think Holy clearly loss first fight, but that Lewis clearly loss rematch(although not as much as Holyfield loss in first fight)-you dig.Who do you think won? Later brother brolog.




hey why you copying my threads

hey why you copying my threads
Sorry Mike,i couldn't resist it. Did you mean the "loss" thing-or have you already done the "Holyfield vs Lewis rematch" thread?
I will edit the "loss" word then.Later brother brolog.

It was very close but I had lewis winning by a point or 2. It could have been called a draw and I would not have been outraged. The thing is that the first fight was such a blatant travesty of justice that i was glad that lewis got the benifit of the doubt.

Yes, I think Holyfield squeeked by in the second for a decision. There's been a big trend lately in boxing about all the bad decisions. I think alot of it has been horse-****. When fights go the distance there's going to be a difference of opinions, simple as that. I think the outcry for Lewis-Holyfield I having an investigation into the decision was nothing more than absolute bull****. If that was a bad decision, it wouldn't rank in my top 500 bad decisions i've seen. Same as this Oscar Delahoya getting ripped off in his Moseley fights: you don't have afight that close with no fighter ever(and i underline ever) being in danger of being close to going down, deserve to be considered a controversial fight.
Bottom line: If you can't knock the ****er out, then you don't deserve to ***** about no damn bad decision.

Yes, I think Holyfield squeeked by in the second for a decision. There's been a big trend lately in boxing about all the bad decisions. I think alot of it has been horse-****. When fights go the distance there's going to be a difference of opinions, simple as that. I think the outcry for Lewis-Holyfield I having an investigation into the decision was nothing more than absolute bull****. If that was a bad decision, it wouldn't rank in my top 500 bad decisions i've seen. Same as this Oscar Delahoya getting ripped off in his Moseley fights: you don't have afight that close with no fighter ever(and i underline ever) being in danger of being close to going down, deserve to be considered a controversial fight.
Bottom line: If you can't knock the ****er out, then you don't deserve to ***** about no damn bad decision.

boxing aint all about knocking people out....
It ain't called the sweet science for no reason

In my opinion, Lewis took both fights - first one by 8-10 points, second one by 2 or 3. First one was an outrage, second one was fair, but you could've called it a draw without blushing.

Second fight was closer but make no mistake Lewis won clean. I had Lewis 116-112.

that was a very close fight

Holyfield clearly lost the first fight. They should have rightfully given that fight to Lewis.

In an attempt to undo the conspiracy surrounding the first fight, The judges gave the second fight to Lewis on a silver platter. The fact that Lewis didn't earn a win in the second fight cleanly, just adds a little tarnish to his career, as did the first fight to Holyfield's career.

i would hafe to say lewis without a doubt won the first fight and the second was closer but lewis still clearly won that fight too

there is no denying that it was a close fight, but if you scored it for holyfield then you were looking to give him rounds, lewis won by about 2-3 rounds.

Sorry Mike,i couldn't resist it. Did you mean the "loss" thing-or have you already done the "Holyfield vs Lewis rematch" thread?
I will edit the "loss" word then.Later brother brolog.



what do you mean by the "loss"
thing?

Holyfield should have won.

It all depends on how you define the term "affective agression".

Holyfeild was definately the more aggressive, but it was not affective and even rooting for Holyfeild, I could not give it to him.

Lewis definately did not do enough to win without any controvery at all. He used his size and jab / 1-2 all night, but didn't ever really try to take Holyfeild out.

holyfield got owned in both fights

For sure, Lewis did not win convincingly. I even thought it was a draw.

But there was a glaring revelation: Lewis at the time was already on the downhill, as shown by the fact that he had a mighty tough time with an aging, past-his-prime Holyfield. :rolleyes:

Lewis won both fights in my opinion.

i didn't c the fight, can sum1 post it plz?

what do you mean by the "loss"
thing?


He probably means the way you typed "loss" instead of "lost", it's unique, and maybe he thought you did it on purpose as a way to kind of "mark" your threads, just my opinion.

holyfield got owned in both fights
Yes you are an idiot.

Here's the problem, TNT. Holyfield really lost the second fight. That's the way it looks in the record books, and that's the way it will be remembered. Whether the judges scored the fight poorly is a different issue, but if they did, that doesn't mean that Holyfield won. It means maybe he should have won. Big difference.

By the way, I agree, Holyfield deserved the decision in the second fight.

Holyfield got destroyed in the first fight, but he gave Lennox Lewis a run for his money in the second fight..

Holyfield turned garbage after the Lewis fights, though..

Ya know being a Holyfield fan you'd think that I would have Evander winning this fight, but unfortuneatley I keep coming up with the same score, 115-113, for Lewis.

i need to c the second one... sum1 post it plz