Tweet
watched this fight last night:
I had Holyfield winning 1,5,6,7 and 12 with round 3 and 9 even. Lewis winning 2,4,8,10 and 11.
its a draw for me.
Alot of the rounds were close and very difficult to score.
I found this about the press scorings after the fight:
U.S. PRESS REACTION
WALLACE MATTHEWS (New York Post): Maybe this is boxing***8217;s way of telling Holyfield it is time to quit, or maybe the message is coming from an even higher authority. But if Holyfield can***8217;t win a decision after the way he fought last night, perhaps he just can***8217;t win anymore . . . The Post had Holyfield a 116-112 winner.
STEVE SPRINGER, who scored it 116-113 in favour of Lewis (Los Angeles Times): Holyfield had all his weapons working, and indeed hurt Lewis on several occasions. But in the end, he couldn***8217;t break through to do the kind of damage he had done in the past to win the heavyweight title three times.
DOUG KRIKORIAN, who had it 117-114 in Holyfield***8217;s favour (Long Beach Press-Telegram): . . . for a large portion of a fierce brawl marked by dramatic ebbs and flows, Holyfield out-hustled, out-slugged and out-thought his plodding opponent . . . Indeed, in a performance that defied his age and wealth, the 37-year-old multimillionaire Holyfield seemed to be the dominant fighter in the lively proceedings with his harder punches and more aggressive tactics.
BILL PLASCHKE, who had it 115-113 in favour of Lewis (Los Angeles Times): A heavyweight can win a fight by simply fighting smart. So Lewis did just that.
STEVE SIMMONS (Toronto Sun): The odd part of the judges***8217; decision was that this fight was far closer than the first Holyfield-Lewis bout in March, which was scored a draw. Some ringside observers had Holyfield winning last night, some had Lewis winning. The Sun scored the bout a draw. Any of those decisions would have been acceptable.
BOB KRAVITZ (Scripps Howard News Service): Of course, a draw would have been an invitation to riot. They had to give it to somebody. The question is, why Lewis? What did he do to win the fight? . . . This was supposed to be the night Lewis was revealed. Instead, it was the night he was exposed.
STEPHEN BRUNT, who had Lewis winning, 115-113 (Toronto Globe and Mail): During the early rounds and in the late rounds, Lewis outboxed Holyfield with relative ease, just as he did the first time they fought in March at Madison Square Garden. Though Holyfield was a whole lot better in the rematch, and especially a whole lot more focused, Lewis still controlled him with the jab, frustrating most of his advances.
BILL LYON (Philadelphia Inquirer): Although the same decision was reached by all three judges, the verdict was far from unanimous among ringsiders. You could find almost as many people who thought Holyfield had won. Included in this group is your humble clerk-typist, who scored it 117-114 for Holyfield. Lest you think this was less than objective assaying, your humble clerk-typist had picked Lewis to win.
RON BORGES (Boston Globe): For 12 rounds, Evander Holyfield appeared to get the better of Lennox Lewis . . . but the three judges saw it differently . . . This time, instead of investigating just one judge [a reference to Eugenia Williams, who had Holyfield beating Lewis in their first bout], the federal government should haul all three up on charges, especially 83-year-old Bill Graham, whose scorecard was an advertisement for mandatory retirement.
GEORGE KIMBALL (Boston Herald): While some fans and media ringsiders scored the fight for Holyfield, they were almost invariably those who either picked Holyfield or bet on him . . . The Herald card had Lewis winning 115-113 although a draw would have been less outrageous in this one than in their first fight.
BERNARD FERNANDEZ, who had Lewis winning, 115-114 (Philadelphia Daily News): Lewis . . . again came across as a technically proficient but passionless automaton who lacks the charisma to get the crowd involved . . . In the battle for most fans***8217; hearts and minds, Holyfield wins every time.
MICHAEL KATZ (New York Daily News): . . . any attempt to paint the rematch with the same dirt as the original must be based on prejudice against the ****y Briton or for Holyfield. No, Lewis deserved the triumph.
JERRY IZENBERG (Newark Star-Ledger): Lewis was never in serious danger although he often looked exhausted and sporadically fought as though he were. He won it close but he won it fair.
DEAN JUIPE, who had it 114-114, a draw (Las Vegas Sun): That Lewis, by virtue of his three championships, is now the focal center of the sport merely reflects its mediocre condition. Technically he***8217;s the undisputed champion yet there***8217;s considerable dispute whether he truly deserved this victory, and there***8217;s little dispute he is hardly among the all-time greats.
CHRIS JONES, who had Holyfield winning, 115-113 (The National Post, Canada): Lewis seemed more relieved than ecstatic. He raised his arms after the fight, as he had eight months ago, but the joy didn***8217;t seem genuine this time around. It seemed forced.
MICHAEL ROSENTHAL (Los Angeles Daily News): Holyfield was better than he was when he and Lennox Lewis fought to a controversial draw in March, much better. Better against a behemoth like Lewis, who has almost every physical advantage, just wasn***8217;t good enough.
KEVIN KIERNAN (New York Post): The boxing world desperately wanted a knockout and instead got another lukewarm fight.
WILLIAM C. RHODEN (New York Times): Saturday night, boxing got the shot of adrenaline it needed. Lennox Lewis and Holyfield, who fought to a draw eight months ago, gave the sort of epic performance for which boxing at its highest level is known.
I had Holyfield winning 1,5,6,7 and 12 with round 3 and 9 even. Lewis winning 2,4,8,10 and 11.
its a draw for me.
Alot of the rounds were close and very difficult to score.
I found this about the press scorings after the fight:
U.S. PRESS REACTION
WALLACE MATTHEWS (New York Post): Maybe this is boxing***8217;s way of telling Holyfield it is time to quit, or maybe the message is coming from an even higher authority. But if Holyfield can***8217;t win a decision after the way he fought last night, perhaps he just can***8217;t win anymore . . . The Post had Holyfield a 116-112 winner.
STEVE SPRINGER, who scored it 116-113 in favour of Lewis (Los Angeles Times): Holyfield had all his weapons working, and indeed hurt Lewis on several occasions. But in the end, he couldn***8217;t break through to do the kind of damage he had done in the past to win the heavyweight title three times.
DOUG KRIKORIAN, who had it 117-114 in Holyfield***8217;s favour (Long Beach Press-Telegram): . . . for a large portion of a fierce brawl marked by dramatic ebbs and flows, Holyfield out-hustled, out-slugged and out-thought his plodding opponent . . . Indeed, in a performance that defied his age and wealth, the 37-year-old multimillionaire Holyfield seemed to be the dominant fighter in the lively proceedings with his harder punches and more aggressive tactics.
BILL PLASCHKE, who had it 115-113 in favour of Lewis (Los Angeles Times): A heavyweight can win a fight by simply fighting smart. So Lewis did just that.
STEVE SIMMONS (Toronto Sun): The odd part of the judges***8217; decision was that this fight was far closer than the first Holyfield-Lewis bout in March, which was scored a draw. Some ringside observers had Holyfield winning last night, some had Lewis winning. The Sun scored the bout a draw. Any of those decisions would have been acceptable.
BOB KRAVITZ (Scripps Howard News Service): Of course, a draw would have been an invitation to riot. They had to give it to somebody. The question is, why Lewis? What did he do to win the fight? . . . This was supposed to be the night Lewis was revealed. Instead, it was the night he was exposed.
STEPHEN BRUNT, who had Lewis winning, 115-113 (Toronto Globe and Mail): During the early rounds and in the late rounds, Lewis outboxed Holyfield with relative ease, just as he did the first time they fought in March at Madison Square Garden. Though Holyfield was a whole lot better in the rematch, and especially a whole lot more focused, Lewis still controlled him with the jab, frustrating most of his advances.
BILL LYON (Philadelphia Inquirer): Although the same decision was reached by all three judges, the verdict was far from unanimous among ringsiders. You could find almost as many people who thought Holyfield had won. Included in this group is your humble clerk-typist, who scored it 117-114 for Holyfield. Lest you think this was less than objective assaying, your humble clerk-typist had picked Lewis to win.
RON BORGES (Boston Globe): For 12 rounds, Evander Holyfield appeared to get the better of Lennox Lewis . . . but the three judges saw it differently . . . This time, instead of investigating just one judge [a reference to Eugenia Williams, who had Holyfield beating Lewis in their first bout], the federal government should haul all three up on charges, especially 83-year-old Bill Graham, whose scorecard was an advertisement for mandatory retirement.
GEORGE KIMBALL (Boston Herald): While some fans and media ringsiders scored the fight for Holyfield, they were almost invariably those who either picked Holyfield or bet on him . . . The Herald card had Lewis winning 115-113 although a draw would have been less outrageous in this one than in their first fight.
BERNARD FERNANDEZ, who had Lewis winning, 115-114 (Philadelphia Daily News): Lewis . . . again came across as a technically proficient but passionless automaton who lacks the charisma to get the crowd involved . . . In the battle for most fans***8217; hearts and minds, Holyfield wins every time.
MICHAEL KATZ (New York Daily News): . . . any attempt to paint the rematch with the same dirt as the original must be based on prejudice against the ****y Briton or for Holyfield. No, Lewis deserved the triumph.
JERRY IZENBERG (Newark Star-Ledger): Lewis was never in serious danger although he often looked exhausted and sporadically fought as though he were. He won it close but he won it fair.
DEAN JUIPE, who had it 114-114, a draw (Las Vegas Sun): That Lewis, by virtue of his three championships, is now the focal center of the sport merely reflects its mediocre condition. Technically he***8217;s the undisputed champion yet there***8217;s considerable dispute whether he truly deserved this victory, and there***8217;s little dispute he is hardly among the all-time greats.
CHRIS JONES, who had Holyfield winning, 115-113 (The National Post, Canada): Lewis seemed more relieved than ecstatic. He raised his arms after the fight, as he had eight months ago, but the joy didn***8217;t seem genuine this time around. It seemed forced.
MICHAEL ROSENTHAL (Los Angeles Daily News): Holyfield was better than he was when he and Lennox Lewis fought to a controversial draw in March, much better. Better against a behemoth like Lewis, who has almost every physical advantage, just wasn***8217;t good enough.
KEVIN KIERNAN (New York Post): The boxing world desperately wanted a knockout and instead got another lukewarm fight.
WILLIAM C. RHODEN (New York Times): Saturday night, boxing got the shot of adrenaline it needed. Lennox Lewis and Holyfield, who fought to a draw eight months ago, gave the sort of epic performance for which boxing at its highest level is known.
Comment