Top 20 heavyweights all time

[The D3vil]

Princess, go look in the mirror and hang your pathetic head in shame at the worthless oxygen thieving man-child that looks back at you. That a grown ass adult like you is man-crushing an athlete like a teen who's balls just dropped is just gross and creepy. Your ma surbation-like nationalist di ck stroking could be a case study in the most toxic garbage that afflicts the world. Now do everybody a favor and look up the letters FO and follow the directions you find. Ignored for wasting my time with juvenile bullsh it and toxic stu pidity.

WU7KSze.gif......

[IronDanHamza]

Dude, when Hoyfield retired in the mid '90s due to heart failure, a key symptom of steroid use.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-04-27-sp-50878-story.html

Dude was literally caught in a steroid sting

https://nypost.com/2007/03/02/report-holyfield-used-alias-to-buy-steroids/

Stop the bullshxt.

Until you can show me anything close to that about Mike Tyson, there is no comparison.

I often wonder, is there any actual concrete evidence that these things are even true in that article? Other than a reporter claiming it? I've never actually seen it. Have we seen the actual paper work for "Evan Fields"?

Also, when they called the number and "Holyfield answered", how did they know it was Holyfield exactly?

Either way, none of the above proves anything. If true, it just points to a suspect case of likely steroid use. He never failed a drug test, we don't know for sure if he used or not.

[Willie Pep 229]

I often wonder, is there any actual concrete evidence that these things are even true in that article? Other than a reporter claiming it? I've never actually seen it. Have we seen the actual paper work for "Evan Fields"?

Also, when they called the number and "Holyfield answered", how did they know it was Holyfield exactly?

Either way, none of the above proves anything. If true, it just points to a suspect case of likely steroid use. He never failed a drug test, we don't know for sure if he used or not.

It is more than a single reporter. It is Sports Illustrated whose reputation is on the line.

Late Wednesday, SI.com reported that the name "Evan Fields" appeared on law enforcement documents reviewed by the Web site in connection with the Mobile investigation. SI.com dialed a phone number associated with "Fields" that was listed on one of the documents, and Holyfield answered the call. "Fields" listed birth date in the document -- Oct. 19, 1962 -- also is the same as Holyfield's.

Full Article.

https://www.espn.com/espn/news/story?id=2782741

[IronDanHamza]

It is more than a single reporter. It is Sports Illustrated whose reputation is on the line.

Late Wednesday, SI.com reported that the name "Evan Fields" appeared on law enforcement documents reviewed by the Web site in connection with the Mobile investigation. SI.com dialed a phone number associated with "Fields" that was listed on one of the documents, and Holyfield answered the call. "Fields" listed birth date in the document -- Oct. 19, 1962 -- also is the same as Holyfield's.

Full Article.

https://www.espn.com/espn/news/story?id=2782741

Right but my question is, how did they know Evander Holyfield answered the phone?

Is there any actual evidence of that being in any way true?

How do we even know someone wasn't impersonating Holyfield by using his birth date? Or trying to set him up? We don't. All we have on this is hearsay, nothing of any actual substance to prove it.

I'm not saying that's what happened, it likely isn't but none of it actually proves anything in regards to actual drug use.

At best it could circumstantially point to him (Evan Fields) perhaps buying the drugs, we still don't know if he used them or not.

[Willie Pep 229]

Right but my question is, how did they know Evander Holyfield answered the phone?

Is there any actual evidence of that being in any way true?

How do we even know someone wasn't impersonating Holyfield by using his birth date? Or trying to set him up? We don't. All we have on this is hearsay, nothing of any actual substance to prove it.

I'm not saying that's what happened, it likely isn't but none of it actually proves anything in regards to actual drug use.

At best it could circumstantially point to him (Evan Fields) perhaps buying the drugs, we still don't know if he used them or not.

SI remarks measure to libel. If he didn't answer the phone he would have protested and demanded a retraction.

In the full article he is given two opportunities to express his side. One was an excuse about buying drugs for his now dead father and the second was a straight up denial.

He never chose to address the phone call. Neither confirming or denying it happened.

Considering the way these scandals usually play out he would have jumped on the remark if he had been able.

". . . that was listed on one of the documents, and Holyfield answered the call . . ."

There is no legal wiggle room in the SI statement. If they couldn't prove they were talking to Holyfield he would have sued.

1. The clinic in Alabama gets busted.
2. Evan Fields is a client.
3. The avaiable phone number is Holyfield's residence and he answered the phone.
4. Holyfield's absurd growth and body appearance screams PEDS.

You're acting the good defense attorney but the circumstantial evidence is over whelming, but as you argue it likely dosen't reach over the reasonable doubt bar legally.

But the man will be remembered dirty.

[IronDanHamza]

SI remarks measure to libel. If he didn't answer the phone he would have protested and demanded a retraction.

In the full article he is given two opportunities to express his side. One was an excuse about buying drugs for his now dead father and the second was a straight up denial.

He never chose to address the phone call. Neither confirming or denying it happened.

Considering the way these scandals usually play out he would have jumped on the remark if he had been able.

". . . that was listed on one of the documents, and Holyfield answered the call . . ."

There is no legal wiggle room in the SI statement. If they couldn't prove they were talking to Holyfield he would have sued.

1. The clinic in Alabama gets busted.
2. Evan Fields is a client.
3. The avaiable phone number is Holyfield's residence and he answered the phone.
4. Holyfield's absurd growth and body appearance screams PEDS.

You're acting the good defense attorney but the circumstantial evidence is over whelming, but as you argue it likely dosen't reach reach over the reasonable doubt bar legally.

But the man will be remembered dirty.

He did protest all of it, and vehemently deny it.

How could they possibly know it was Holyfield who answered the phone? Can they see through the phone? Or are they just psychic?

[Kid Cauliflower]

I can say that before moving up in weight Holyfield was already one of the hardest looking boxers ever. He added bulk, much of it muscle.

Now looking back his early body does not seem so especially hard. That could suggest many modern boxers are juiced. We got used to the look. I don't think there is enough evidence to dismiss Holy as a cheating scumbag, but enough to be suspicious.

[QueensburyRules]

Right but my question is, how did they know Evander Holyfield answered the phone?

Is there any actual evidence of that being in any way true?

How do we even know someone wasn't impersonating Holyfield by using his birth date? Or trying to set him up? We don't. All we have on this is hearsay, nothing of any actual substance to prove it.

I'm not saying that's what happened, it likely isn't but none of it actually proves anything in regards to actual drug use.

At best it could circumstantially point to him (Evan Fields) perhaps buying the drugs, we still don't know if he used them or not.

- - Vander never the brightest a victim of his era circumstances that also saw him hang on too long like Ali.

[Willie Pep 229]

He did protest all of it, and vehemently deny it.

How could they possibly know it was Holyfield who answered the phone? Can they see through the phone? Or are they just psychic?

SI doesn't print that statement if they can't prove it. SI is not Alex Jones or Fox News. No one has sued them.

If Holyfield doesn't know the shot when picking up the phone, and hears that it is SI, he doesn't hesitate to confirm to SI he is Evander Holyfield.

I feel confident it would be easy for the reporter to set him up. I'll get with SI!

Yes he did protest and denied, I stated that. So did OJ, Trump, and Bundy.

I also said he didn't dispute the phone call. He only disputed the PEDs use.

[JAB5239]

SI doesn't print that statement if they can't prove it. SI is not Alex Jones or Fox News. No one has sued them.

If Holyfield doesn't know the shot when picking up the phone, and hears that it is SI, he doesn't hesitate to confirm to SI he is Evander Holyfield.

I feel confident it would be easy for the reporter to set him up. I'll get with SI!

Yes he did protest and denied, I stated that. So did OJ, *****, and Bundy.

I also said he didn't dispute the phone call. He only disputed the PEDs use.

Gotta agree with this.