As I'm up configuring this new computer, I managed to catch a fight tonight.
I didn't realize it was tonight, but about 30 minutes ago, Evander Holyfield (38-8-2) returned to the boxing ring at 43 years old to take on Jeremy "Beast" Bates (21-11-2).
The track record of aged fighters, George Foreman notwithstanding, hasn't been very good. Considering it was Evander's first fight in two years, I wasn't really sure how this would look.
Holyfield appeared to be in pretty good shape - for someone who's 43 years old. Compared to 2002, when he last held a title belt, he's definitely put on a bit of fat around the edges.
No matter. Evander and his group made sure this wouldn't be too strenuous of a comeback. Holyfield beat up on Bates at the end of the first round before absolutely pummeling him in the second, leading the referee to stop the fight. He looked good in moving around the ring and landing his combinations, but Bates was so stationery that it wasn't too difficult, and the early end meant that stamina didn't matter. Evander barely broke a sweat.
Can Evander climb the ladder to become a heavyweight champion for the 5th time? Looking at his physique, I would say no. But considering the dearth of talent in the heavyweight division right now, who's to say that he can't? Boxing hasn't been able to develop any names since...well, since Evander Holyfield took the title in 1991, Lewis, Rahman, Byrd, Klitschko(s)? None of them had the mass appeal Evander still enjoys.
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Warrior Resurrection?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I agree with your observations, including those on the Holyfied fight, except for your treatment of Lewis. In my mind, he stands out from the rest in all the years since Buster Douglas floored Mike Tyson. Lewis' talent took longer to develop because he's a very complicated person. But Lewis is the only one who took on all comers. The one blemish was the loss to Rahman. In retrospect, it looks better since Rahman has put an ok career together and Lewis did avenge the loss. Lennox isn't an all-time great, but I think he was every bit the champ that Holyfield was, which I agree certainly doesn't match the talent seen in lesser weight classes during the same era.
I would have to rate Lewis a notch below Holyfield. Most of his fights were quite boring or decisions, and he had his share of sub-par performances (such as Rahman and Klitschko). Combined with his lack of aura or personality, I don't rank him as great aa fighter as previous champions or notables.
Need I remind you of these 2 fights, courtesy of Wikipedia...
By 1999, the public was clamoring for a unification bout between Holyfield and the WBC's world champion, Lennox Lewis of England. That bout happened in February of that year, and things were left right where they were at, when the bout was declared a controversial draw after twelve rounds where it appeared to most that Lewis dominated the fight. They were ordered by the three leading organizations of which they were champions to have an immediate rematch, and the second time around, in November of that year, Lewis became the undisputed champion by beating Holyfield by a unanimous decision.
Hard for me to rank Holyfield ahead of Lewis when they had similar careers, are a similar age, AND Lewis beat Holyfield both time they fought.
Post a Comment