Nikolai Valuev vs. Evander Holyfield

Enter your Nikolai Valuev vs. Evander Holyfield fan card
CONTROVERSY RATING: 100%
The percentage of fan cards that disagree with an official result. Exclusively on EYE ON THE RING.
Nikolai Valuev vs. Evander Holyfield
Fan Rating: 
0
Your rating: None
1
Average: 1 (2 votes)

Date: 
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Location: 
Zurich, Switzerland
Rounds Scheduled: 
12
Contracted Weight: 
Heavyweight
Titles at Stake: 
WBA Heavyweight Championship
Referee: 
Luis Pabon

Official Judging
Pierluigi Poppi 116 - 112
Mikael Hook 115 - 114
Guillermo Perez Pineda 114 - 114

More:



Evander Holyfield makes one last attempt to regain a portion of the Heavyweight Championship when he takes on WBA Champion Nikolai Valuev. After twelve timid rounds, Holyfield appears to have finally realized his dream but is denied once again when the judges award Valuev a highly controversial majority decision win.




Averaged Fan Card:

round 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Nikolai Valuev
                                                                    
9.10
9
9
9.20
9.10
9.90
9.80
10
9.30
9
9
10
Evander Holyfield
                                                                    
9.90
10
10
9.80
9.90
9.10
9.30
9
9.70
10
10
9


Fan Cards: Nikolai Valuev vs. Evander Holyfield


scorecard by CHAMPION97
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
9
9
10
113
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
10
10
9
115


scorecard by GOLD
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
112
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
116


scorecard by RORSCHACH
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
112
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
116


scorecard by ENDOFME1994
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
10
9
9
10
10
9
9
9
10
112
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
9
10
10
9
9
10
10
10
9
116


scorecard by JTL
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
10
9
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
113
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
9
10
9
10
9
10
10
10
9
116


scorecard by BOXING KNOWLEDGE
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
112
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
116


scorecard by LUKASZRPB
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
10
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
113
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
9
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
10
10
10
9
115


scorecard by COREY WILLINGER
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
9
10
9
10
10
9
9
10
112
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
10
9
10
9
9
10
10
9
116


scorecard by TALESFROMTHECRYPT
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
10
10
9
10
9
9
9
10
112
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
9
9
10
9
10
10
10
9
116


scorecard by MIKE25
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
NIKOLAI VALUEV
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
9
9
10
113
EVANDER HOLYFIELD
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
10
10
9
115


Comments

Champion97's picture

This is the kind of fight that people who don't understand boxing would call dull and boring, it was one of those fights where both guys are aiming to nullify reach other, not just tear each other to pieces, and I personally think variety is good in the sport, it is good to see a war, but it is also good to see a tentative, tactical boxing match.

rorschach's picture

Evander should have won this fight.

Gold's picture

This is the worst title fight I have ever had the displeasure of seeing!

First of all, let's talk about the two boxers. "Sugar" Nikolai Valuev, the WBA champion, is possibly the worst and most unathletic world championship boxer I have ever seen in my life, both in terms of his boxing ability and physique. Evander Holyfield, a once truly great champion, is beyond shot at this point with an insane amount of miles on him. Physically, he's in incredible shape, juiced out of his mind, but his athletic ability and boxing skills have long left him.

There are almost no tactical adjustments made in this fight. The fight is fought at an insanely slow pace because the fight is a terrible stylistic matchup and both guys are in extremely poor form. This represents almost the entirety of the fight: Holyfield bounces around, uses lateral movement, and then tries to get inside on Valuev's 8000 inch jab. If he gets inside, he lands combinations on Valuev because Valuev is a terrible boxer who has no idea how to fight on the inside or use his size outside of his jab. If he doesn't get on the inside, then Valuev has a chance to use his 8000 inch jab which represents the vast majority of punches he lands in this fight.

I personally think this is a robbery, Valuev almost exclusively only lands jabs for the vast majority of the fight and he doesn't have good enough punch output, ring generalship, etc to offset the flurries of power punches Holyfield has here and there. Overall, I don't think this is a hard fight to score either, the rounds are relatively definitive. I have no idea how Poppi scored this 8-4 for Valuev. However, I don't really feel sorry for Holyfield in not getting the decision even if it would have made him the only five-time world heavyweight champion and oldest heavyweight champion in history. He certainly contributed to it being an absolutely horrible fight.

Champion97's picture

If it was so bad and such a displeasure, why watch it?

Because.......... I like tearing fights apart.
Not every fight is a slugfest.

Gold's picture

Same reason people watch The Room directed by Tommy Wiseau, because it's so bad you have to see it to believe it. There is nothing here to tear apart, both guys are basic and formulaic in how they fight, partially because of the size/stylistic matchup. This isn't like Lara or Rigondeaux where they had low output and were tentative but are clearly world class boxers, both of these guys are just in absolutely terrible form.

Champion97's picture

Unathletic, first off looks aren't relevant, certainly not at heavyweight, second, 300 lbs, 7 feet tall!
Holyfield did great in the early rounds, a foot shorter, and still landing clean shots, and at his age? Wtf did you want from him?!

Gold's picture

It's not the fact he is 310 lbs, it's what 310 lbs represents. He shouldn't be 310 lbs because he's supposed to be an athlete. The fact he's unathletic has shown in the ring. Holyfield did well in the first rounds in comparison, it was extremely low punch output and he was able to land flurries because Valuev is not a good boxer at all.

Champion97's picture
Gold's picture

Thoughtful response. Valuev is a terrible boxer and athlete for a world champion. If you are saying he's 7 ft tall as an excuse, first off there are plenty of great 7 ft tall athletes out there, Valuev just isn't one of them. If he wanted to use 300 lbs as an advantage, that would be one thing, but he doesn't use it at all.

Champion97's picture

There was beef when I replied to you before, but I still strongly disagree with you on this fight.

Gold's picture

I stand by everything I said, there is low punch output and quality boxing e.g. Bernard Hopkins, but that isn't what this is at all. This is just two guys, Valuev who is one dimensional and not good versus old Holyfield who is shot and trying to fight a conservative gameplan to negate the opponents one ability which lead to a negative and repetitive fight.

Champion97's picture

That's your opinion, but, there is only so much you can rip on a guy when he has won 6 world title fights, beat John Ruiz twice, facts are facts.
Ok, Holyfield was old, I think really, Valuev was given too much credit by the judges, and Holyfield deserved the win, so what does that mean?, he's a level below a fighter who you give credit to, maybe so, but there have been poorer world champions than Valuev in boxing before, he did enough to win a lot of the time, and in this fight, there was the age factor, granted, but historically, I think Holyfield was a level above, and he won rounds against Holyfield, and Haye, not by looking good, but by doing what he has to do to win rounds, as he did well enough to win against Ruiz.

Here's my opinion, Valuev was never on the same level as Ali, he doesn't make my top 15 heavyweights of all time, his victories, Ruiz, Liakhovich, Barrett, Beck, not bad, but not great victories. On the other hand, Valuev was athletic enough to win 12 rounds in a row against Liakhovich, his extreme size helped him, but he did the basics well, and above all, he was a world champion, defended 5 times I believe, who did he lose to? Chagaev, Haye, no shame there, so you have to give him credit as a good fighter at world level, great?, I don't think so, but his achievements speak for themselves.

I think the fan in people makes them get carried away, and because they don't see what they want to see from a world champion, they don't like them, and lack of entertainment, and lack of achievement and ability get mixed up, a bit like everyone hating Adonis Stevenson, yes he avoids top fighters, and he obviously does!, he is a bit of a buzzkill to the marketability of the sport, but he won a world title, and has defended it time and time again.

I think if any heavyweight world champion should be considered the worst, it shouldn't be Valuev, it should be a fighter more along the lines of Charles Martin, a guy who fought a title vacated by a real world champion, fought another mandatory which the IBF deem deserving for the same silly reason as ordering Klitschko to fight Leapai, Brook to fight Bizier. Martin wins the title because Glazkov (a guy who couldn't even beat Malik Scott) twists his knee, so Martin wins the title, and loses it straight after, in a 2 round mismatch, even he won a world title, but if there is a world champion to disregard, disregard Martin, not Valuev.

I understand what you are saying, but "one dimensional" is only really important in a fight if the opponent can make you need to make some adjustments. The fact that Holyfield was being conservative doesn't help your point, because in fights, especially considering Valuev's size and lack of speed, it is very hard to work when you are in against an opponent who refuses to engage. Also, if Valuev was that bad, Holyfield, even old, wouldn't have been THAT inactive.

Gold's picture

A lot of people thought he drew or lost to Ruiz the first time and Ruiz was pretty shot the second time around. There is a reason Valuev fought in Germany and Switzerland versus guys like Liakhovich, to protect him in case he was going to lose. He won rounds versus guys like Ruiz and Holyfield because of his jab, as I said his jab is not bad, it's just that its the only thing he had in his toolbox which makes him very annoying to watch. That's why I think he is one of the worst champions in boxing history, if he was 6'4 with the same skill set he would have absolutely never won a world title. His size was the only reason he won and held a world title.

Both Stevenson and Valuev have very bad reigns, Valuev certainly worse though. In my view, holding a title hostage like these guys did and defending it against low-level opposition is one of the worst things a boxer can do in the sport because it spoils the opportunity for other boxers to hold and unify the title. Martin could certainly considered to be worse, he definitely did not deserve to hold that title. At least Martin cashed out the title and fought a worthy opponent instead of holding the title hostage like Valuev though. It isn't zero sum, I can disregard both Martin and Valuev as champions.

Yeah as I have said before, Valuev and Holyfield were not good enough and didn't take enough risks to make each other make adjustments. That's why this fight sucks, they both contributed to it being bad, but Valuev is supposed to be in his prime and Holyfield is an old man.

Champion97's picture

You know your boxing, but you nitpick a bit I think, and even if the Ruiz win isn't what it seems, facts are facts. That's an entertainment issue though, if you can win the fight on the jab, do that. I don't think that's fair to say, and about him being protected, a lot of world champions don't fight the toughest of opposition for whatever reason, his opposition could've been worse, but more importantly, Liakhovich is a response to you saying Valuev was unathletic, if he wasn't well enough conditioned, he wouldn't have won the second half against Holyfield, and he wouldn't have won every single round against Liakhovich.

Here's the thing though, in all realism, the fighters are not to blame, if they can have a belt and not put themselves through the challenges of really, really tough opponents, if they can reign as world champion, they will do that, but we don't get to see fights, yeah yeah, not ideal, but that is not the fighters' problem, don't blame them, blame the organisations. Two ways of looking at it, Martin did what was better for the sport, Valuev, Stevenson were smart. Or maybe just acknowledge them as world champions who weren't your personal favourites, whatever, but I do agree, these are not major world champions who will go down in history, and that attitude is not good for the sport, and whoever is to blame, Klitschko vs Valuev, Kovalev vs Stevenson, wouldn't have hurt.

I think on the one hand, they were patient, they were restricted, on the other hand, they might have both cut corners to a degree. I tnink Holyfield was waiting for mistakes from Valuev, not taking chances, and Valuev, I think was trying to make Holyfield work without giving him openings. Yeah it is very hard to say Valuev is as good as Holyfield on a relative scale, Holyfield beat Tyson, Bowe, Holmes, Qwai, Dokes, he had a great career.

Gold's picture

Yeah but I don't think you can discount the entertainment factor. If someone said Erislandy Lara was a terrible champion, I wouldn't agree with that, but I think you can make an argument for that. He is obviously many times over more skilled than Valuev but doesn't fight top opposition (not entirely his fault) is complacent in the ring, fights at a slow pace, etc. I haven't watched the Liakhovich fight at all so I can't rate Valuev's performance in that fight. I agree that people have to be careful in accessing resumes, if someone really wants they can make an argument that Sugar Ray Leonard is overrated, but it wouldn't be a good one at all. The thing is I am not saying Holyfield was decent in this fight and Valuev was bad, I am saying they both were really bad.

I can't blame guys like Valuev and Stevenson for making money by sitting on their titles considering quite a lot of guys retire broke and busted up. In the same vein, I also can't respect them as good champions because of their lack of top opposition. The WBC definitely should have forced Stevenson to fight his mandatory though, I agree with that.

That is part of why I think this fight sucks, you have explained why it was a very negative fight. Holyfield is certainly a top 50 all-time great boxer given his accomplishments, he was just super far gone at this point from all of the wars with guys like Qwai and Bowe.