Who is the best Hw of the last 30 years

[edgarg]

The night Dec 6th on which Klitschko destroyed Johnson was the night that the Lewis rematch had been pencilled in to take place. And, I'd really like to know which 2 rounds Lewis won. I assume one was the rd in which his eyebrow was gashed although he was actually winning that rd. I know he didn't win rds 5 and 6. Which means that Lewis was fading and Klitshko was revving up.

i should rephrase this last post.I don't know which 2 rds Lewis is supposed to have won. I assume that one rd was the one in which Klitschko's eyebrow was gashed, although Klitschko was winning that rd otherwise. I know that Lewis did not win either rd 5 or 6, a good indication that Lewis was done and Klitschhko was just getting into a higher gear.

[Hamaru]

I will go with Tyson if we are talking about him in his prime. He has great head movement, speed, and crazy knock out power. I don't see anyone on the list that would beat him while at his best.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Maybe, but consider, in acknowledging the Tyson of 86-89 to be the best, you also can't deny that every one of the others mentioned, no matter how much they might train, would never reach Tyson's level, because he was a ONE OF A KIND, whereas Tyson became what be became, because he slacked off his training and changed his corner. Also he was a kid who was too successful too soon with no guidance except "Don King".

He had "IT" the others didn't.

I completely agree, Edgar.

If we're talking about a given fighter on their best night fighting another given fighter on their best night, then I have to go with Mike Tyson. History will place several of the others above him as "greater," but Tyson would emerge victorious in any conceivable match-up. And if we're talking about excitement, there's no contest whatsoever. Tyson stands far removed from the rest. He could generate more excitement in one round than some of these guys could in several fights.

[bojangles1987]

Either Holmes or Holyfield. I voted for Holmes.

[bojangles1987]

Maybe, but consider, in acknowledging the Tyson of 86-89 to be the best, you also can't deny that every one of the others mentioned, no matter how much they might train, would never reach Tyson's level, because he was a ONE OF A KIND, whereas Tyson became what be became, because he slacked off his training and changed his corner. Also he was a kid who was too successful too soon with no guidance except "Don King".

He had "IT" the others didn't.

OVERRATED. Seriously. You act like 86-89 Tyson didn't ever show weakness against average fighters. Holmes at his best easily beats Tyson, Lennox comfortably does so, Holyfield does, maybe even Bowe. Tyson wasn't beating up guys that good.