Can you produce evidence to support your claim that "many ringsiders" thought that Lewis lost the rematch? A scorecard from a journalist who was at ringside, a judges scorecard, a broadcasters scorecard? You should really produce "many" of these to support your claim, but a couple will do me. Should be easy for you, there were so many of them according to you.
#1 You do realize that fans are considered ringside observers? You do realize that fans chanting "bull****" when the decison is announced is a sure sign that the wrong man won? Either way,42 out of 48 ringside reporters had Holyfield the clear winner and that included the British press association. Col. Bob Sheridan (famous commentator) gave Holyfield the first seven rounds, with the first round even, his final tally was 116-113 in favor of Holyfield!
Holyfield was completely unmarked whereas Lewis was and looked beaten up at the bell (consolation remark)
"borderline immoral" What's wrong with you?
That was the most anticipated fight in modern heavyweight history. It is the richest fight in heavyweight history. It is the msot watched fight in modern heavyweight history. And to you it was "borderline immoral"?? Both adults involved wanted it, the whole boxing world wanted it, there were millions and millions at stake and Tyson was ranked #2 in the world at heavy and you don't think it should have come of?
You see, the problem with a guy like you is, if Lewis hadn't met Tyson you'd be in here whining about the duck. As it is you are trying to paint the most inevitable fight of that decade as "borderilne immoral".
It's utterly bizarre, but I shouldn't be surprised really.
No. The Lewis- Tyson fight was a sham and we all knew it. Even Emmanuel Steward commented before the fight saying:
"Everyone is holding on to that image of Mike Tyson from 10 to 12 years ago...that Mike Tyson is gone."
Nope. There are dozens of contrary opinions on the forum. Those guys aren't trolls.
Trolls are guys who are only capable of forming one opinion. I know your opinion on every single matter relating to Lewis without asking you because only the most negative possible viewpoint is possible for you. I it is impossible for you to hold anything other than this view. Your opinion is not informed by "articles and video" is is pre-concieved by personal prejudice.
This is why you are a troll.
I'm sure you do refer to him as that in your completely empty house.
So you're gonna tell me how I reach my own conclusion? Weird.
I have given you enough. I have given articles,I have given quotes,I can give you video and it's all out there. Why would I have a personal prejudice against Lewis? Because he's English? No,I like Tyson Fury,Henry Cooper,Hamed etc
I have given you enough and I'm pretty bored with you're corny jokes and insults. My empty house? ooh got me!
Do your own research. I will give you 100 articles written around Lewis time and you tell me,could all of these boxing writers have a prejudice against Lewis? Or are they all just reporting based on facts and what they truly believe? So I'm a troll because I told you basically what other people say about Lewis? You're a **** because you cant except any new information. Do some research of your own and you will see I am not the only one who feels like this about Lummox glass jaw Lewis.
check out some articles and argue with them and call them trolls.
To Fool's Paradise
. By Mitch Albom
. Published: 02/12/1997
-Sports of the Times; Lewis's Legacy Is Taking a Beating
By DAVE ANDERSONPublished: June 23, 2003
-Champ, yes, but Lewis still has proven little
By Tim Graham
Special to ESPN.com
-Lennox Lewis - Overrated in retirement?
Top Rank Matchmaker Bruce Trampler
-Lewis had limited impact
by The Washington Times
-Close But No Cigar: The Trouble With Larry And Lennox
By Mike Casey (2006)
-BOXING; Despite Lack of Seasoning, Lewis Retains W.B.C. TitleBy TIMOTHY W. SMITHPublished: September 27, 1998