Best cherry pickers of all time.

[JeanPaulValley]

RING Magazine's Top-50 All-Time Heavyweights

Lewis #39 Ha! Best since Ali? Yeah right. The Lummox can't hide the truth,he's a devious and sinister prick who fought drug addicts and old bums.

[WatchfortheHook]

Felix Sturm.

No doubt.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

You want me to do all the work here.

No, I want you to back up what you say. It's natural, and it's a standard the board holds every single member to. Remarks like this:

I already know the truth about Lummox,if you want to find something YOU should look it up.

Are utterly pathatic.

You almost started crying when you found out I only posted the title's,dates and authors of the articles and not the links also!

I was totally non-plussed, but I certainly wasn't upset. Your'e a troll. I'm ripping you up. If you'd posted actual sources in support of your bizarre position it would have been bad for me. I was happy you fucked up again.

To be clear, you claimed that there were "lots of people", stressing journalists, who were out there who felt the same way you did. You've claimed that "Lennox Lewis only fought two prime contenders". I would be astonished to see that in print from a respected source. You've claimed that Golota "was a mental patient". I'd be amazed to see that backed up in black and white by a known boxing source. I would, howver, also be interested to see it.

So your failure to provide links supporting them, although unsurprising, was dissappointing, I admit.

I tried to play by your rules but you just keep asking the same questions.

What questions?

In closing,just think about how many numerous sports writers and boxing journalists say Lummox is overrated in retirement.

And think about how many rate him very highly. Here's Cox, who had him in the top 10 as early as '05:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Or how about SportsRatings who have him at #8?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Google "Boxing Scene Top 25 Heavyweights" and you will see he is at #9 on their list.

ESB's Classic poll has him at #5

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


What you are doing, rather pathetically, is saying that because you've read some writers who think he is overated (although you've failed to provide any links, I believe you) that it is a fact. Some writers think he's overated. Some think he is not. Some think he is underated. This is a difference of opinion not a mandate for you to spam this forum.

They can't all have a prejudice or personal bias-but you can pretend they do so you have a reason to not believe what they say about Lewis

I think they have valid opinions. Why are you confusing my opinion of there viewpoint with yours? Many fo theirs are valid. Yours are very obviusly ridiculous:

and his joke of a career.

Are you fucking retarded? How can you call a two-time HW champion of the world a joke? "A joke of a career"? What do you make of Gary Mason's career? If Lewis, #1 HW in the world for an extended period by most sources is "a joke", what is a guy like Glen Johnson to you?

"The thing is Lewis could have been much better,I remember when he fought Tua,and Lewis never once pressed him,He could have looked spectacular that night but didnt because he knew he didnt have to look spectacular to win....I will still say Holyfield was the more complete fighter.The better fighter.
I dont think he's (Lewis) top 10 of all time,Top 15 Yes."

Fine. He could have looked more spectacular. To me, there are 14 elite HW's, as long as Lewis is ranked among them (and he almost certainly does) I think that's absolutely fine. What you won't see is this guy saying his career is "a joke" he was "the greatest cherry picker of all time" and that "he only fought two prime contenders". You won't find him saying these things because he is not a troll/idiot like you are. I have absolutely no problem with what he said.

Bruce Trampler had this to say:

"Holyfield was an all time great,Lennox is highly overrated.I really give him demerits for those knockout losses to Oliver Mccall & Hasim Rahman and his last performance against Vitali Klitschko.
He outsized Guys? So what? I dont know how far you would have to go to find a lot of heavyweights who would have kicked the shit out of Lennox lewis,But its not too far.
He was NOT a top 10 Heavyweight and I'm NOT sure if he was a top 20 Heavyweight.....Yes I am.He wasn't.
He was a good fighter but not a Hall of Famer.Hes not an ATG.Hes on par with Vitali Klitschko,But I'm not sure hes better and nobody is writing about the greatness of Vitali Klitschko,And nor should they."

I disagree with this. It's an extreme point of view. Lewis outside the top 20 is unacceptable to me, it seems ridiculous. I disagree with this guy strongly.

No doubt you would disagree strongly with the linked lists that have him top 10.

Yeah Lummox Lewis was an overrated cherry picking bum.

But this is a different level. I can't believe you are comparing yourself to bixing writers with your bizarre opinions. You're trolling hard, boy:

The Lummox Can't punch his way through a wet paper bag.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

RING Magazine's Top-50 All-Time Heavyweights

Lewis #39 Ha! Best since Ali? Yeah right. The Lummox can't hide the truth,he's a devious and sinister prick who fought drug addicts and old bums.

It is interesting to me that you post this Ring list like it is meaningful and insightful, but you've ignored every mention of the fighter's you are running down as "bums" and "jokes" and "mental patients" and "shot" being ranked in the top 10/top 5 in the world at the time they met Lennox Lewis by the same organisation. This is the very definition of cherry-picking

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

It is interesting to me that you post this Ring list like it is meaningful and insightful, but you've ignored every mention of the fighter's you are running down as "bums" and "jokes" and "mental patients" and "shot" being ranked in the top 10/top 5 in the world at the time they met Lennox Lewis by the same organisation. This is the very definition of cherry-picking

Yeah 2 time champion of the world. Who did he fuckin beat?

Got his first title from the garbage literally.

Beat Shannon Briggs for the true Lineal title.
Let's examine Briggs. Briggs has nothing on his resume. He even needed a gift from the judges to beat a 48 year-old Geroge Foreman. Not only did Briggs have chronic asthma but he fought Lewis with a broken hand an nearly put him to sleep in round 1!

48 YEAR OLD FOREMAN= IRON CHIN

PRIME LUMMOX LEWIS = SPONGE CHIN

Speaking of Foreman,George did an interview before he commentated on the Tyson-Lewis con.

Scorecard
Posted: Tuesday May 14, 2002 5:51 PM
Q+A: George Foreman
With the June 8 Mike Tyson-Lennox Lewis bout coming up, we grilled HBO boxing announcer George Foreman
By Richard Deitsch


SI: What's your pick for Tyson-Lewis?


Foreman: If Tyson comes in at 222 pounds or under, I give him the edge. I'll take him in a knockout. Three rounds.


SI: In your prime how quickly do you knock out Lewis?


Foreman: Two rounds.


HAHA, FOREMAN SAID HE WOULD KO THE GLASS JAWED BUM IN 2 ROUNDS


"...And who's he fought compared to me? Ray Mercer beat him but was robbed of the decision. His claim to fame is beating Razor Ruddock - a fighter whose reputation had been built on losing twice to Mike Tyson..."-Evander Holyfield from How can Lewis accuse me of running? He is just a paper champion...
by Jeff Powell June, 1998

LENNOX = NO LEGACY LUMMOX
GETS PUT TO SLEEP WHEN A CREAM CAKE HITS HIS FACE
LENNOX LEWIS = JAM DOUGHNUT CHIN

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

No, I want you to back up what you say. It's natural, and it's a standard the board holds every single member to. Remarks like this:



Are utterly pathatic.



I was totally non-plussed, but I certainly wasn't upset. Your'e a troll. I'm ripping you up. If you'd posted actual sources in support of your bizarre position it would have been bad for me. I was happy you fucked up again.

To be clear, you claimed that there were "lots of people", stressing journalists, who were out there who felt the same way you did. You've claimed that "Lennox Lewis only fought two prime contenders". I would be astonished to see that in print from a respected source. You've claimed that Golota "was a mental patient". I'd be amazed to see that backed up in black and white by a known boxing source. I would, howver, also be interested to see it.

So your failure to provide links supporting them, although unsurprising, was dissappointing, I admit.



What questions?



And think about how many rate him very highly. Here's Cox, who had him in the top 10 as early as '05:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Or how about SportsRatings who have him at #8?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Google "Boxing Scene Top 25 Heavyweights" and you will see he is at #9 on their list.

ESB's Classic poll has him at #5

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]


What you are doing, rather pathetically, is saying that because you've read some writers who think he is overated (although you've failed to provide any links, I believe you) that it is a fact. Some writers think he's overated. Some think he is not. Some think he is underated. This is a difference of opinion not a mandate for you to spam this forum.



I think they have valid opinions. Why are you confusing my opinion of there viewpoint with yours? Many fo theirs are valid. Yours are very obviusly ridiculous:



Are you fucking retarded? How can you call a two-time HW champion of the world a joke? "A joke of a career"? What do you make of Gary Mason's career? If Lewis, #1 HW in the world for an extended period by most sources is "a joke", what is a guy like Glen Johnson to you?




Fine. He could have looked more spectacular. To me, there are 14 elite HW's, as long as Lewis is ranked among them (and he almost certainly does) I think that's absolutely fine. What you won't see is this guy saying his career is "a joke" he was "the greatest cherry picker of all time" and that "he only fought two prime contenders". You won't find him saying these things because he is not a troll/idiot like you are. I have absolutely no problem with what he said.



I disagree with this. It's an extreme point of view. Lewis outside the top 20 is unacceptable to me, it seems ridiculous. I disagree with this guy strongly.

No doubt you would disagree strongly with the linked lists that have him top 10.



But this is a different level. I can't believe you are comparing yourself to bixing writers with your bizarre opinions. You're trolling hard, boy:

Anyone who mentions this glass chin cherry picking platypus in the top 10 is on crack bro! Lummox is the most nondescript champion ever.

Lummox is on par with Valuev only a bit more lucky.

Lummox Derives from Scots dialect: A lummox is a large, gangly, lanky and useless waste of space. A poor excuse for a human being. Lummox, A large, dimwitted, lumbering oaf of a person lacking tact, intellectual prowess, and manual dexterity. As such, this  creature is unable to get out of it's own way.

It's true too because many writers said that if Lummox didn't have a problem he would "create one" and his footwork was worse than Bambi on ice.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

Anyone who mentions this glass chin cherry picking platypus in the top 10 is on crack bro! Lummox is the most nondescript champion ever.

This is the difference between you and I. You think anyone who disagrees with you (the majority, btw) is "on crack", i think anyone who has Lewis high but outside the ten is OK. You're obsessed and weird, i'm even-handed.


Again, more ranting and almost no dealing with the direct points that have been made. Here's a list of stuff you've avoided in your time cherry-picking posts in this thread -

• How Mercer can be said to have beaten Lewis despite punch stats weighed heavily against him.
• How Holyfield can be said to have beaten Lewis despite punch stats weighed against him
• Which journalists agree with you that Lewis fought only two prime contenders in his career
• Why many lists that appear on the 'met have Lewis in their top ten ("they're on crack" isn't a reasonable response)
• Which questions you mean when you bizarrely accuse of me of "repeating questions non stop"
• What sort of respect you have for a fighter like Gary Mason or Glen Johnson given that you see Lennox Lewis's career as "a joke".
• Why you've cherry-picked Ring articles and stats that agree with you whilst continuing to ignore the Ring rankings that clearly paint Lewis as one of the greats

And this doesn't even take into account some of your most bizarre claims, including that Tyson-Lewis shouldn't have happened in spite of defeaning calls in the boxing industry to the contrary at the time.

In short, it's an embarrassing litany of spurious claims and a ridiculous doding of the facts, which is exactly the ticks trolls who try to run down any great fighter tend to exhibit...

[Richel Hersisia]

Originally Posted by SweatPea

soon to be Canelo

soon to be? he has only fought 2nd rate welter and junior welters so far... he would be nr1 of my list...

Yeah Floyd and Pac did a lot of cherrypicking in the last 4 years or more.. But they earned their stripes by beating the best in and around their weightclass first.

[KidDynamite]

The punch stats were heavily against Mercer? He landed 223 total punches against Lewis' 235 total. Thats a 12 punch difference ... and Mercer connected on 59% of his total punches against the 44% success rate of Lewis.

He completely out jabbed Lewis, landing 60% of them compared to Lewis who only landed 33% ... not only was he more successful he also connected more than Lewis overall by landing 134 compared to 106 for Lewis.

Mercer was more efficient that night and dictated the fight.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by KidDynamite

The punch stats were heavily against Mercer? He landed 223 total punches against Lewis' 235 total. Thats a 12 punch difference ... and Mercer connected on 59% of his total punches against the 44% success rate of Lewis.

He completely out jabbed Lewis, landing 60% of them compared to Lewis who only landed 33% ... not only was he more successful he also connected more than Lewis overall by landing 134 compared to 106 for Lewis.

Mercer was more efficient that night and dictated the fight.

He was more efficient at getting hit with big punches, too.

He landed thirty more power punches than Mercer. If you can produce a scorecard that has the loser landing thirty or more power punches by compubox than the opponent, i'd be genuinely impressed. The only one I can think of that was recent was Bradley's win over Pacquiao

[JeanPaulValley]

[quote=McGrain;14338797]

• How Mercer can be said to have beaten Lewis despite punch stats weighed heavily against him.

• Old Mercer beat Lewis. Punchstats? What like the HBO compubox which is endlessly criticized and insulted? Please. The people know. I know because I watch that fight. Even Holyfield said Mercer won.

• How Holyfield can be said to have beaten Lewis despite punch stats weighed against him

  Once again punch stats are from an unreliable computer. Boxing existed years without compubox just fine.
• ARE WE SURE ABOUT THIS? LEWIS OUTHUSTLED AND OUTPUNCHED IN REMATCH

by Doug Krikorian



"Lennox Lewis wound up winning a unanimous decision against Evander HolyfieldSaturday evening at the Thomas & Mack Center, but this time many observers - including this one - didn't think he deserved it. In fact, for a large portion of a fierce brawl marked by dramatic ebbs and flows, Holyfield outhustled, outslugged and out-thought his plodding opponent and almost sent him to the canvas in a classic seventh round that had the crowd of 17,916 in a shrieking uproar... The punch statistics favored Lewis, with Lewis credited with throwing 490 and connecting on 195, compared to 416 and 137 for Holyfield. But these numbers are unreliable, since they're rung up at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] by two guys punching computer buttons."

Why many lists that appear on the 'met have Lewis in their top ten ("they're on crack" isn't a reasonable response)

Let me tell you. Lewis resume on paper is brilliant. When you look into the circumstances of his fights it gets shady. If people rank him based on paper resume,they're dumb.

What sort of respect you have for a fighter like Gary Mason or Glen Johnson given that you see Lennox Lewis's career as "a joke".

I love Glen Johnson because he was a warrior willing to fight guys under any circumstances. He didnt wait until his opponents was on drugs or old.

Why you've cherry-picked Ring articles and stats that agree with you whilst continuing to ignore the Ring rankings that clearly paint Lewis as one of the greats

No one who knows the circumstances behind the scenes think Lewis was so great. Lewis was so very lucky. Who wouldn't want Lionel Butler for a title eliminator?
Butler was a crack-cocaine addict!

And this doesn't even take into account some of your most bizarre claims, including that Tyson-Lewis shouldn't have happened in spite of defeaning calls in the boxing industry to the contrary at the time.

There were many reports that Tyson wasn't in shape,wasn't mentally prepared etc Tyson-Lewis should not have happened. Tyson was a drug addict and was 10 years past his prime. He also hadnt had a meaningful win since what? Seldon or Bruno? Tyson's fights before Lewis should were not enough to warrant a title shot. Lewis just wanted a name on his resume-even if the name was of a washed up drug addict.

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

He was more efficient at getting hit with big punches, too.

He landed thirty more power punches than Mercer. If you can produce a scorecard that has the loser landing thirty or more power punches by compubox than the opponent, i'd be genuinely impressed. The only one I can think of that was recent was Bradley's win over Pacquiao

"The punch statistics favored Lewis, with Lewis credited with throwing 490 and connecting on 195, compared to 416 and 137 for Holyfield. But these numbers are unreliable, since they're rung up at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] by two guys punching computer buttons."

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

Old Mercer beat Lewis. Punchstats? What like the HBO compubox which is endlessly criticized and insulted? Please. The people know. I know because I watch that fight. Even Holyfield said Mercer won.

"The people know". I absolutely guarantee you that if you started a poll asking who won that fight on this forum, Lewis would win the poll.

"Lennox Lewis wound up winning a unanimous decision against Evander HolyfieldSaturday evening at the Thomas & Mack Center, but this time many observers - including this one - didn't think he deserved it. In fact, for a large portion of a fierce brawl marked by dramatic ebbs and flows, Holyfield outhustled, outslugged and out-thought his plodding opponent and almost sent him to the canvas in a classic seventh round that had the crowd of 17,916 in a shrieking uproar... The punch statistics favored Lewis, with Lewis credited with throwing 490 and connecting on 195, compared to 416 and 137 for Holyfield. But these numbers are unreliable, since they're rung up at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] by two guys punching computer buttons."

And the AP scored the fight for Lewis, 116-113. So what? Of course you can find a presscard for Holyfield. The fight was not a wide victory. But again, "the people" generally score the fight for Lennox Lewis.


"Even Evander Holyfield didn't dispute it when all three judges voted for Lewis and made him the undisputed heavyweight champion. In the first fight, Holyfield complained that his performance was affected by leg cramps. There were no excuses this time."

-CNN

Why do you think if you find ONE press article that agrees with you, you have the result "right" beyond all dispute? It's absolutely ridiculous. I've produced two cards that have it for Lewis, are you now about to change your mind about who won?

Let me tell you. Lewis resume on paper is brilliant. When you look into the circumstances of his fights it gets shady. If people rank him based on paper resume,they're dumb.

EVERY fighter can begin to look "shady" if you belive the extreme points of view available for their big fights. Muhammad Ali -

Won against Liston because Sonny threw both fights.
Lost the only meaningful fight between himself and Frazier.
Lost two out of three to Norton who was robbed at least once.
Beat Foreman on a dodgy count and ducked a rematch. Foreman was drugged.
Robbed Young and Shavers.
Beat a past-prime Patterson because he had a dodgy back.
Lost to Doug Jones and was given a gift on the cards.
Would have lost to Cooper if he hadn't been given extra time to rest between rounds.

All of these individual exaggerations, lies and speculations can be found on the internet in "print" if you look hard enough. If you chose to believe them all you are a fucking idiot. That is what you do where Lennox Lewis is concerned.

There were many reports that Tyson wasn't in shape,wasn't mentally prepared etc Tyson-Lewis should not have happened. Tyson was a drug addict and was 10 years past his prime. He also hadnt had a meaningful win since what? Seldon or Bruno? Tyson's fights before Lewis should were not enough to warrant a title shot. Lewis just wanted a name on his resume-even if the name was of a washed up drug addict.

He was also universally recognised as one of the best HW's in the world, generally ranked at #2 and the fight was one of the most sought after in boxing history. Your'e an idot to say it shouldn't have happened, and if Lewis had passed on it you would be whining about his ducking a washed up drug addict. The fight was completely inevitable and of course it should have happened.

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

"The people know". I absolutely guarantee you that if you started a poll asking who won that fight on this forum, Lewis would win the poll.




[/color]

And the AP scored the fight for Lewis, 116-113. So what? Of course you can find a presscard for Holyfield. The fight was not a wide victory. But again, "the people" generally score the fight for Lennox Lewis.


"Even Evander Holyfield didn't dispute it when all three judges voted for Lewis and made him the undisputed heavyweight champion. In the first fight, Holyfield complained that his performance was affected by leg cramps. There were no excuses this time."

-CNN

Why do you think if you find ONE press article that agrees with you, you have the result "right" beyond all dispute? It's absolutely ridiculous. I've produced two cards that have it for Lewis, are you now about to change your mind about who won?




EVERY fighter can begin to look "shady" if you belive the extreme points of view available for their big fights. Muhammad Ali -

Won against Liston because Sonny threw both fights.
Lost the only meaningful fight between himself and Frazier.
Lost two out of three to Norton who was robbed at least once.
Beat Foreman on a dodgy count and ducked a rematch. Foreman was drugged.
Robbed Young and Shavers.
Beat a past-prime Patterson because he had a dodgy back.
Lost to Doug Jones and was given a gift on the cards.
Would have lost to Cooper if he hadn't been given extra time to rest between rounds.

All of these individual exaggerations, lies and speculations can be found on the internet in "print" if you look hard enough. If you chose to believe them all you are a fucking idiot. That is what you do where Lennox Lewis is concerned.


He was also universally recognised as one of the best HW's in the world, generally ranked at #2 and the fight was one of the most sought after in boxing history. Your'e an idot to say it shouldn't have happened, and if Lewis had passed on it you would be whining about his ducking a washed up drug addict. The fight was completely inevitable and of course it should have happened.

Yeah Tyson-Lewis should have happened sometime in the 90's before Lewis stepped aside.

And Ali? No Liston didnt throw shit. The so called "phantom punch" clearly landed flush on the chin as seen in the "when we were kings" documentary.

Foreman drugged? Yeah that's why Ali said "George had me out on my feet but didn't know it."-Ali's autobiography.
Foreman punched himself out. Foreman was up at 8 and today,the fight would have continued but he had nothing left anyway.

Ali is notthing like Lummox Lewis.

Lummox could have fought David Tua when he was 225 pounds,instead he waited until Tua was 250. Ha! Classic Lennox.

Lummox Lewis has no legacy. What is his signature win?

And by the way,even if the Tyson-Lewis fan was wanted by casual fans who dont know shit,beating old drug additc Tyson means nothing.
Danny Williams beat that version of Tyson faster and in better fsashion. Danny Williams wasn't clinching all night.

[ushvinder]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

Yeah Tyson-Lewis should have happened sometime in the 90's before Lewis stepped aside.

And Ali? No Liston didnt throw shit. The so called "phantom punch" clearly landed flush on the chin as seen in the "when we were kings" documentary.

Foreman drugged? Yeah that's why Ali said "George had me out on my feet but didn't know it."-Ali's autobiography.
Foreman punched himself out. Foreman was up at 8 and today,the fight would have continued but he had nothing left anyway.

Ali is notthing like Lummox Lewis.

Lummox could have fought David Tua when he was 225 pounds,instead he waited until Tua was 250. Ha! Classic Lennox.

Lummox Lewis has no legacy. What is his signature win?

And by the way,even if the Tyson-Lewis fan was wanted by casual fans who dont know shit,beating old drug additc Tyson means nothing.
Danny Williams beat that version of Tyson faster and in better fsashion. Danny Williams wasn't clinching all night.

So instead of fghting david tua when he was top ranked and in the middle of his prime, he should have fought tua when he was only a rising prospect?

Lennox has a resume better than most heavyweights like tyson and holmes, and you said i dont care what others think im not going to make a poll, yeah because most would disagree and say that your an idiot.

I love it how you like to take your statements as if they are fact and not just an ill mannered opinion. I love it you make it sound like oliver mccall and tommy morison were only on drugs when they fought lennox, but never touched any drugs at earlier stages of thier career. Are you thier personal stalkr? Do you give them pleasure and services, like how the fuck do u know about when they used substances and when they didnt.