How would prime Holyfield done had he fought in the 70s?

[billeau2]

I’ve gotta agree with Queenie,
I know it’s not often.
With Mercer & Morrison it’s stronger.
Now with that said I agree that
Mac lee Foster who was as tough as they come probably beats Evander, and many of the guys evander beat as a light heavyweight or HW.
And Queenie knows how underrated I think Quarry was.
Here is the cannolis , George back in the day pummels Holyfield.
Now I’m a bigger fan of evander than most, because his heart and effort.
He was tailor made for George.
The way Evander used to plant his feet and square up, I think a 1972 George Foreman blows his out in 2-3, similar to Norton.

I second that...here here! for the Queen B! Lets ask ourselves why Holly lost that first fight to Michael Moore. And some of us (ahem!) bet on Moore...so not buying an upset...

basically Holly could be beat by guys who were technically able to deal with pressure, and roughhouse tactics. Toney is another one who was able to outfox Evander.

To generalize: fighters in the 70's as a whole seemed to be more technically able. They could do more things well, even when they were on the fringe. Guys like Lyle and Shavers for example, much less Quarry.

However Holly always had a chance. he was able to drive into a person's weak points and succeed when given an opportunity.

[BKM-]

Kids, I hate to tell you but the 70s HW were freely using PED's just like all other top athletes at the time. They weren't even tested for it back then and it was par for the course. So trying to discredit Holyfield in this manner is both ironic and ******.

Evander could beat all of them or lose to some of them. He had everything in his skillset and physical attributes that a boxer could dream of but he lost focus at times and that's why he struggled against lesser opponents.

But against old Foreman he did not lose focus and he wouldn't against the younger version either. He survives the early onslaught and TKO's Foreman later in the fight. I like Frazier, he's an underrated chap nowadays. It would be back and forth but Evander had the goods to box his ears off if he committed to a strategy instead of slugging with Joe. Prime Larry Holmes? Who did he ever beat that was the kind of quality of a prime Holyfield? The man is overrated because of it. Evander beats him. Ali would be the toughest challenge. I really couldn't tell you about that matchup.

[Joe Beamish]

I don’t think steroids were widely used by boxers in the 70s, though it’s impossible to say, given the absence of testing.

By the mid-80s, steroids usage became very prominent in all sports. And soon we started to see boxers with incredible athletic ability (RJJ) and who were capable of making breathtaking transformations (Holyfield), very unprecedented.

Probably not a coincidence. I’d say steroid usage was at its peak in boxing around the time Holyfield became a HW.

[BKM-]

I don’t think steroids were widely used by boxers in the 70s, though it’s impossible to say, given the absence of testing.

By the mid-80s, steroids usage became very prominent in all sports. And soon we started to see boxers with incredible athletic ability (RJJ) and who were capable of making breathtaking transformations (Holyfield), very unprecedented.

Probably not a coincidence. I’d say steroid usage was at its peak in boxing around the time Holyfield became a HW.

It started in the 60s, bro, possibly earlier. You got the wrong decade. The prominent change to breathtaking bodies and abilities started then.

You can make the argument that Evander was using more advanced drugs but lets not try to play this game where he was supposedly a juicer while the precious golden era 70s HW's were totally clean. PED talk has no place in this topic unless we're gonna be realistic.

[QueensburyRules]

Kids, I hate to tell you but the 70s HW were freely using PED's just like all other top athletes at the time. They weren't even tested for it back then and it was par for the course. So trying to discredit Holyfield in this manner is both ironic and ******.

Evander could beat all of them or lose to some of them. He had everything in his skillset and physical attributes that a boxer could dream of but he lost focus at times and that's why he struggled against lesser opponents.

But against old Foreman he did not lose focus and he wouldn't against the younger version either. He survives the early onslaught and TKO's Foreman later in the fight. I like Frazier, he's an underrated chap nowadays. It would be back and forth but Evander had the goods to box his ears off if he committed to a strategy instead of slugging with Joe. Prime Larry Holmes? Who did he ever beat that was the kind of quality of a prime Holyfield? The man is overrated because of it. Evander beats him. Ali would be the toughest challenge. I really couldn't tell you about that matchup.

- -So, you was using and sharing with all the top 70s hvys is it?

Beam him up Scotty!

[QueensburyRules]

I second that...here here! for the Queen B! Lets ask ourselves why Holly lost that first fight to Michael Moore. And some of us (ahem!) bet on Moore...so not buying an upset....

- -Hard heart diagnosis and retired.

Came back after that evangelist laid hands on him to cure him, Benny something or other.

Insert miracle!

[billeau2]

- -Hard heart diagnosis and retired.

Came back after that evangelist laid hands on him to cure him, Benny something or other.

Insert miracle!

I remember that lol. Just so happened the bastard maker stopped juicing a while as well...funny how that happens.

[billeau2]

Kids, I hate to tell you but the 70s HW were freely using PED's just like all other top athletes at the time. They weren't even tested for it back then and it was par for the course. So trying to discredit Holyfield in this manner is both ironic and ******.

Evander could beat all of them or lose to some of them. He had everything in his skillset and physical attributes that a boxer could dream of but he lost focus at times and that's why he struggled against lesser opponents.

But against old Foreman he did not lose focus and he wouldn't against the younger version either. He survives the early onslaught and TKO's Foreman later in the fight. I like Frazier, he's an underrated chap nowadays. It would be back and forth but Evander had the goods to box his ears off if he committed to a strategy instead of slugging with Joe. Prime Larry Holmes? Who did he ever beat that was the kind of quality of a prime Holyfield? The man is overrated because of it. Evander beats him. Ali would be the toughest challenge. I really couldn't tell you about that matchup.

Hmmm... I don't argue steroids, just do not know enough about what every guy did. I do know that from a biological perspective the quality, the ability of a substance to attach where it should, with no side effects, got better and better. I also know that nutrition at a molecular level is part of the process...My weightlifting buddies who I bounced with used to ask me to give them shots of vitamin B around the backside lol...My friend Mike once got me good. he asked me to do the shot, and he says "I don't feel so good" starts pretending to go into convulsions the bastard! lol.

But to put your argument in proper perspective lets dispense with "old George, Big George" whatever one wants to call Foreman's second coming. It was a nice effort and he did fantastic but its more of a butterbean type thang than comparing great fighters from different eras IMO.

Here is my problem with your take: The bastard maker did not beat all of them. He lost to many of them. He sometimes beat Bowe who was mecurial, though talented... He beat Tyson which was outstanding... At heavyweight Evander was inconsistent. He beat up quality fighters from the 80's, and if someone thinks Donaldson, Mercer, Dokes, tomas and Tillis were on a par with Frazier, Norton, YOUNG Foreman, Ali erc, then yeah he beats them all... but most people would not think they are comparable.

When he fought better guys like Bowe, Toney, and of course Lewis, he faltered, Guys in the seventies had the skill sets of guys like the above, were better conditioned generally, and were just more excellent fighters. I do think Evander always would have a chance though... His real asset was imo that while he could outwork his opponent, he could also end it with superior punching. His weakness was despite all the activity, he did not really know how to apply pressure and force mistakes.

For example, the reason Ruiz beat Joshua was because he applied pressure to set up the shots. Holyfield worked hard all day but was not efficient and I will prove that to you. But first, I am not saying Ruiz is a better fighter, just talking about boxer punchers and the ability to force a man back, and to make mistakes.

NOW, when Holyfield DID use pressure tactics and box he was a much better fighter and he did so twice that really made a difference. He did it against bowe in the fight he won and he did it against Tyson. But he always abandoned this tactic to his detriment, in favor of trying to out punch and out work his opposition.