Why did Holyfield choose to fight Bean over Axel Schultz

[Emon723]

As a follow up to my thread on Tyson being kept away from Henry Akinwande, In June 1998, Akinwande pulled out of a scheduled bout with WBA/IBF champion Evander Holyfield.

Holyfield was then force by the IBF to defend against an undeserving contender Vaughn Bean, who lost a narrow decision to Moorer a year ago, I felt German Axel Schultz, who lost three decisions to Foreman, Botha and Moorer, should have been a given a fourth title try, considering that Schultz also had two fights with Akinwande, the man the Real Deal was supposed to face.

Bean, if I recall was ranked number 4 by the IBF when he fought Moorer, He does not deserve another shot, Holyfield's stock was so high at that time with two wins over Tyson and avenging his loss to Moorer.

[klompton]

Schulz didnt deserve a shot anymore than Bean did. Bean was the (undeserving) #1 contender. Schulz never beat any of the names you mention and it was shown that the only reason he got ranked was because Bob Arum paid Bob Lee of the IBF a fortune so Foreman could defend against a gimme. Its hard to argue that a guy who didnt win any of the fights you mentioned deserves a third title shot based on losing the three previous. Schulz was robbed against Foreman but gimme a break. That says more about the state of Foreman's comeback and the corruption in the sport than anything. Vaugh Bean's rating was likely bought and paid for as well so I dont really care to argue the merits of either as a challenger for even a portion of a belt.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Bean was a nonsense mandatory,, easy money for holyfield,,, Schultz, while probably not deserving, brought more risk than bean, plus the money or holyfield was probably the same for either fight...

[Scott9945]

As a follow up to my thread on Tyson being kept away from Henry Akinwande, In June 1998, Akinwande pulled out of a scheduled bout with WBA/IBF champion Evander Holyfield.

Holyfield was then force by the IBF to defend against an undeserving contender Vaughn Bean, who lost a narrow decision to Moorer a year ago, I felt German Axel Schultz, who lost three decisions to Foreman, Botha and Moorer, should have been a given a fourth title try, considering that Schultz also had two fights with Akinwande, the man the Real Deal was supposed to face.

Bean, if I recall was ranked number 4 by the IBF when he fought Moorer, He does not deserve another shot, Holyfield's stock was so high at that time with two wins over Tyson and avenging his loss to Moorer.

The thread title says Holyfield chose Bean, but later you concede that he was forced to fight him. Evander wasn't someone who would give up titles willingly.

The bottom line is that both Bean and Schulz were second rate contenders anyway, so nobody really cared. Admittedly a Schulz fight would probably more appealing to watch than any Vaughn Bean fight.

[Emon723]

The thread title says Holyfield chose Bean, but later you concede that he was forced to fight him. Evander wasn't someone who would give up titles willingly.

The bottom line is that both Bean and Schulz were second rate contenders anyway, so nobody really cared. Admittedly a Schulz fight would probably more appealing to watch than any Vaughn Bean fight.

I can't think of a better title but yes Holyfield will never gave up a title belt, I agree that Schultz was the more appealing one, but whether its Bean or Schultz, Holyfield would be favored to stop both of them, the Real Deal's reputation went down when he made Bean look so good to hang in there for 12 rounds.

[saintpat]

Maybe I'm misreading, but are you suggesting that Tyson was protected from Henry "The Human Clinch" Akinwande and Holyfield was protected from Alex "Sgt." Shultz?

What universe was this?