Holyfield and Ali have fought most of the top 10 ATG hw's

[BKM-2010]

It's pretty amazing when you think about it although some were of cource past their prime. Ali fought Patterson, Liston, Frazier, Norton, Foreman and Holmes(8-2). Holyfield fought Foreman, Holmes, Bowe, Tyson, Lewis(5-3-1) and almost made it to a fight with Klitschko at one point. Well actually Bowe and Norton aren't top 10 but you get the point. How many fighters can make the same claim? I'm talking top 10-15 ATG's in one single weight class.

[Galileo]

It's pretty amazing when you think about it although some were of cource past their prime. Ali fought Patterson, Liston, Frazier, Norton, Foreman and Holmes(8-2). Holyfield fought Foreman, Holmes, Bowe, Tyson, Lewis(5-3-1) and almost made it to a fight with Klitschko at one point. Well actually Bowe and Norton aren't top 10 but you get the point. How many fighters can make the same claim? I'm talking top 10-15 ATG's in one single weight class.

Lewis vs Holyfield 1 & 2 both very debatable decisions.

Ali vs Norton 2 & 3 very debatable decisions.

Holyfield is without doubt a Top 3 All Time Great Heavyweight.

[joseph5620]

Lewis vs Holyfield 1 & 2 both very debatable decisions.

Ali vs Norton 2 & 3 very debatable decisions.

Holyfield is without doubt a Top 3 All Time Great Heavyweight.

Lewis-Holyfield 1 was not debatable at all. It was one of the worst robberies in the history of the heavyweight division.

Lewis pummeled and hurt Holyfield for almost the entire round seven and one judge still gave it to Holyfield.

I thought Lewis clearly won the second fight too but I already know your agenda against Lewis so there is no point in going further with it.

[BattlingNelson]

I dont think Patterson, Bowe and Tyson are top 10-15. At least they are far from locks. I get the point though. Ali and Holyfield fought them all in a long career. I'm not a particular fan of Holyfield for several reasons, but he sure was a warrior and he fought them all.

I cannot, straight off the bat, name any fighters missing from either resume.

[Galileo]

Lewis-Holyfield 1 was not debatable at all. It was one of the worst robberies in the history of the heavyweight division.

Lewis pummeled and hurt Holyfield for almost the entire round seven and one judge still gave it to Holyfield.

I thought Lewis clearly won the second fight too but I already know your agenda against Lewis so there is no point in going further with it.

You are the only person within my memory who does not think Lewis vs Holyfield (1) was not debatable - Lewis was the clear winner in almost everyone's opinion. mine included

Lewis vs Holyfield (2) was "Robbery" of 48 ringside reporters at the fight 45 had Holyfield as the clear winner. My own opinion was Holyfield won 9-3rds.

I have no agenda against Lewis which you claim i have. Lennox Lewis is part of boxing history, in my opinion he was a very decent fighter. I seen him fight live` on 5 occasions, so you could say i am quite a fan of his. Having traveled the length and breadth of Great Britain to watch him fight. Because i tell boxing history how i believe it was and how i believe it unfolded, seems to be a problem to you. However that is completely immaterial to me. You hold Lennox Lewis in the highest possible esteem whereas i don't rate him as highly as you do. I like to debate Lewis career and the careers of most heavyweight champions. However it is my opinion that the career of Lewis is not correctly or truthfully debated on boxing forums. Many young fans who were not alive in the 1990s when Lewis was fighting, along with many older ones like yourself hold Lewis up as the greatest heavyweight champion of all times. If not the greatest, then certainly in their Top 3 of all time. Whereas myself i rate Lewis as a Top 15-20 rated All Time Heavyweight... Now you along with others are entitled to your opinion of how high or low you rate Lewis, Just like i am entitled to my opinion of how high or low i rate him. If you are able to debate points of his career which prove me to be wrong or incorrect, that is something which will "Shut me up".. because once someone shows/proves me to be wrong, then i will hold my hands up and say, "i got it wrong" and Lewis will move up in my estimation... But for over 20yrs i have proved you wrong on virtually every single aspect of the career of Lewis, and all you have done is try to ridicule and trash my person. Which tells me that you know that i am correct and you are wrong... So please stop trying to make out that i have some kind of "Agenda" against Lewis..whenever i see Lewis mentioned in a topic i put my opinion to that topic. My opinion does not tally with your opinion, but i don't accuse you of having an "Agenda"...

If i was to be honest, i much rather debate any champion other than Lewis. Because when debating Lewis, it is like a broken record going over and over again. I enjoy debating Dempsey, Louis, Ali, Frazier along with hundreds of other fighters who i know quite a lot about. When debating other champions i like most other boxing fans, have a ratings scale in my head of where i rate champions of the past. So if a Topic came up on the forum say, Lewis vs Frazier.. You would claim Lewis would beat Frazier. Myself on the other hand would disagree and claim Frazier would beat Lewis. You would claim Lewis beat Mike Tyson fair and square. i would claim Lewis beat a version of Mike Tyson who was addicted to prescription anti-depressants, Cocaine, alcohol and cannabis, which is why they could not hold their fight in Las Vegas. You would hairbrush over all those facts and try to make-out Lewis beat a near prime Tyson because that is how you operate.

[Galileo]

I dont think Patterson, Bowe and Tyson are top 10-15. At least they are far from locks. I get the point though. Ali and Holyfield fought them all in a long career. I'm not a particular fan of Holyfield for several reasons, but he sure was a warrior and he fought them all.

I cannot, straight off the bat, name any fighters missing from either resume.

I am interested to hear why you are not a fan of Holyfield Bat?

[BattlingNelson]

I am interested to hear why you are not a fan of Holyfield Bat?

His headbutts and the obvious PED suspicioun.

[joseph5620]

You are the only person within my memory who does not think Lewis vs Holyfield (1) was not debatable - Lewis was the clear winner in almost everyone's opinion. mine included

Lewis vs Holyfield (2) was "Robbery" of 48 ringside reporters at the fight 45 had Holyfield as the clear winner. My own opinion was Holyfield won 9-3rds.

I have no agenda against Lewis which you claim i have. Lennox Lewis is part of boxing history, in my opinion he was a very decent fighter. I seen him fight live` on 5 occasions, so you could say i am quite a fan of his. Having traveled the length and breadth of Great Britain to watch him fight. Because i tell boxing history how i believe it was and how i believe it unfolded, seems to be a problem to you. However that is completely immaterial to me. You hold Lennox Lewis in the highest possible esteem whereas i don't rate him as highly as you do. I like to debate Lewis career and the careers of most heavyweight champions. However it is my opinion that the career of Lewis is not correctly or truthfully debated on boxing forums. Many young fans who were not alive in the 1990s when Lewis was fighting, along with many older ones like yourself hold Lewis up as the greatest heavyweight champion of all times. If not the greatest, then certainly in their Top 3 of all time. Whereas myself i rate Lewis as a Top 15-20 rated All Time Heavyweight... Now you along with others are entitled to your opinion of how high or low you rate Lewis, Just like i am entitled to my opinion of how high or low i rate him. If you are able to debate points of his career which prove me to be wrong or incorrect, that is something which will "Shut me up".. because once someone shows/proves me to be wrong, then i will hold my hands up and say, "i got it wrong" and Lewis will move up in my estimation... But for over 20yrs i have proved you wrong on virtually every single aspect of the career of Lewis, and all you have done is try to ridicule and trash my person. Which tells me that you know that i am correct and you are wrong... So please stop trying to make out that i have some kind of "Agenda" against Lewis..whenever i see Lewis mentioned in a topic i put my opinion to that topic. My opinion does not tally with your opinion, but i don't accuse you of having an "Agenda"...

If i was to be honest, i much rather debate any champion other than Lewis. Because when debating Lewis, it is like a broken record going over and over again. I enjoy debating Dempsey, Louis, Ali, Frazier along with hundreds of other fighters who i know quite a lot about. When debating other champions i like most other boxing fans, have a ratings scale in my head of where i rate champions of the past. So if a Topic came up on the forum say, Lewis vs Frazier.. You would claim Lewis would beat Frazier. Myself on the other hand would disagree and claim Frazier would beat Lewis. You would claim Lewis beat Mike Tyson fair and square. i would claim Lewis beat a version of Mike Tyson who was addicted to prescription anti-depressants, Cocaine, alcohol and cannabis, which is why they could not hold their fight in Las Vegas. You would hairbrush over all those facts and try to make-out Lewis beat a near prime Tyson because that is how you operate.

The fact you gave Lewis only 3 rounds in the second fight not only proves you have an agenda, but also gave me a good laugh. Thanks.

[Galileo]

The fact you gave Lewis only 3 rounds in the second fight not only proves you have an agenda, but also gave me a good laugh. Thanks.

most of the 45 ringside reporters also only thought he won 3rds so maybe they also have an agenda ha ha ha

[joseph5620]

most of the 45 ringside reporters also only thought he won 3rds so maybe they also have an agenda ha ha ha

Do you have a link for these 45 reporters that only gave Lewis three rounds?