Best cherry pickers of all time.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

Lewis fought good names,not good fighters.

That is absolutely ludicrous.

If you tried to tell a pro that Holyfield was a "good name and not a good fighter" when he met Lennox Lewis, you would be laughed at more than you are in this thread. Holyfield was unquestionably one of the best HW's in the world when Lewis beat him. Unquestionably. Ray Mercer was not a good fighter according to you. Gary Mason was not a good fighter according to you. Vitali Klitschko was not a good fighter according to you.

You are fucking incredibly stupid.

Yeah Golota crumbled because he was a mental patient who should not have been cherry picked by the supposed "best in the world."

He was cherry picked because Lewis new he wuold crumble mentally in the ring Incredible.

Old Holmes beat Mercer who gave prime Lewis Hell. Mercer wanted a rematch and suggested giving fight procede to charity and Lewis refused. I wonder why?

Because he was beaten pretty clearly?

Vitali also wanted a rematch after giving Lewis hell. See a pattern?

Yeah, Lewis beats fighters and then doesn't rematch them What a bastard.

Wladimir Klitschko and Jack Johnson are examples of great heavies who lost fights and didn't give rematches. But no, you whine on about Lewis beating guys.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by igor_otsky

this aint tko6 thread right?

Nope, just TKO6 level of posting.

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

Vitali was leading on all scorecards! This is a fact look it up.

So what?? If you mash someone's face in when they are leading on the scorecards you LOSE THE BOXING MATCH.

This is a fact look it up.

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Nope, just TKO6 level of posting.


So what?? If you mash someone's face in when they are leading on the scorecards you LOSE THE BOXING MATCH.

This is a fact look it up.

I realize you lose the fight but perhaps you should rematch the man and win convincingly. Is that such a strange concept to you?

[JeanPaulValley]

[quote=McGrain;14327179]That is absolutely ludicrous.

If you tried to tell a pro that Holyfield was a "good name and not a good fighter" when he met Lennox Lewis, you would be laughed at more than you are in this thread. Holyfield was unquestionably one of the best HW's in the world when Lewis beat him. Unquestionably. Ray Mercer was not a good fighter according to you. Gary Mason was not a good fighter according to you. Vitali Klitschko was not a good fighter according to you.

You are fucking incredibly stupid.

I'm stupid? No sir. I have the sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.

He was cherry picked because Lewis new he wuold crumble mentally in the ring Incredible.

Pretty much yeah. Just like Lewis didnt rematch McCall until McCall had deteriorated into drugs and alcohol. McCall was under house arrest when Lewis came running for a rematch. Everyone knows a healthy McCall would smash Lewis wafer chin again.
If you saw Golota foul himself out of 2 titles,would you think him a good guy to fight?

Because he was beaten pretty clearly?

No. Mercer smashed Lewis face to pieces and Lewis was given the decision like he was given his WBC title. Gift Wrapped.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

There is at least one out there, see if you can add to it in support of your rather spurious claim.Look up the article I gave you. The writer reports how many of the crowd were chanting things like "robbery" or "bullshit" after Lewis was announced the winner of the Holyfield rematch.

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.

It's borderline immoral to fight a fighter as past his prime as Tyson was.

"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.

Any prime ATG champion would beat the 2002 version of Tyson.

So? What the FUCK does that prove? Every all time great prime champion would beat every figher that Marciano, Louis, Dempsey and Holmes ever faced.

That fight was meaningless.

SO unless an opponent can beat an ATG he is a meaningless opponent??? hahahaha

And as bad as Tyson was,Lewis didnt look so great doing it.

Although he was aclaimed by numerous ex professionals an excellent one, Foreman and McGrory amongst them.

You fucking guys think that anyone who disagrees is a "troll."

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.

Whatever,in my house we refer to Lennox as "Lummox Lewis,the glass chinned cherry picking con man."

I'm sure you do refer to him as that in your completely empty house.

[McGrain]

I'm stupid? No sir. I have the sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.

It is interesting that in your genius you neglect to address most of the points that are put to you and instead post drivel like the above.

If you saw Golota foul himself out of 2 titles,would you think him a good guy to fight?

Golota was a heralded, ranked opponent. He was the number four fucking heavyweight in the world you idiot. Of COURSE he's a valid opponent.

This is the thing you seem completely unable to grasp. Lewis is one of the most dominant hw in history by the numbers, by the facts. What this means is, he wasn't playing the alphabet game and matching guys like Stander or Coopman a la Frazier and Ali he was only matching ranked contenders. So even if he was having soft defences they were still valid defences and were less soft than the counterparts in question.

Golota was ranked as the 4th best HW on the planet. Even if that was generous, what additional seven fighters can be ranked ahead of him? And if seven fighters can be ranked ahead of him, what is wrong with ranking the #11 ranked HW?

Your'e all over the place. You are retrospectively trying to deconstruct rankings that were built by a generally hostile boxing public Statside. Nobody was doing him any favours, but his record against ranking heavywights in unparalleled post-Holmes. It cannot work any more than it works when other idiots try to do it with Louis and even Ali, both of which are possible

Mercer smashed Lewis face to pieces and Lewis was given the decision like he was given his WBC title. Gift Wrapped.

Ludicrous thing to say, but as expected. Like I say, you are incapable of believing (or representing) anything different (which is why people call you a troll).

Lennox Lewis SD Ray Mercer

This is a really weird good fight with Lennox Lewis in the pocket swapping uppercuts (maybe in wee dress rehersal for Klitschko) but sometimes being outjabbed by a relative dwarf. Mercer's jab was a threat throughout, as was his bungling lunging style and his swarming attacks. On occasion these swarming attacks had Lewis in a spot of bother and he looks dog tired after just such a spell in the sixth, but Mercer perhaps saves him some serious bother by gassing all the more dramatically.

Round 4 is one of my favourite HW rounds with Lewis showing what he was so capable of but in a future echo of his immediate lineage, reluctunce to do it, devastating and elastic combinations and some really genuinely nice bodywork, which he had to can due to an aggressive and ill-judged warning from the awful Mercante Jnr about low blows.

For all the bluster and hubub surrounding this fight, I didn't have it that close with round 4 as the real turning point, Mercer is willing but his mind just refuses to sign off on the cheque his body needs to write to take the win. The desperate air surrounding the fight is perhaps more about the circumstances the two men find themselves in - Mercer one poor effort away from being put out to pasture, Lewis one loss away from a return to the UK - that lends it that feeling, that and the contradictory but exhorting rambles Steward offers up in the Lewis corner.

Lewis understandably bemoanded the size of the ring, and it's fair to say that a bigger ring brings a cleaner result, but he would later admit this fight did him a "world of good". Must be nice to find out you have heart, and even if the test has subsequently been overstated, Lennox certainly passed.

LEWIS: 3,4,6,7,8,9,10

MERCER 1,2,5.

I thought 3 and 5 were the only really arguable rounds, and they got one each.


You can paint it as a close fight if you wish (the judges certainly did) but the idea that it was wide for Mercer is questionable at best. Also, whining about Vitali's loss to Lewis whilst whining that Mercer "smashed his face to peices" is utterly pathetic.

Facts, as your so fond of them:

Lewis threw more punches.

Lewis landed more punches.

Lewis outlanded Mercer in terms of power-punches heavily, 129-89 by compubox.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

I realize you lose the fight but perhaps you should rematch the man and win convincingly. Is that such a strange concept to you?

No more or less strange than retiring as a millionaire when past prime rather than taking a difficult fight. For me, one response is as reasonable as the other. For you, no doubt, Lewis is ducking Vitali Klitschko, after cherry-picking him Not that he was actually a good fighter, being just a good name and all.

And you're confused about why people call you a troll...

[Hands of Iron]

Yeah, Mercer isn't filed under his list of of "ranked" opponents, but how many 1990s heavyweights ran more hot-and-cold? Quality scalp regardless.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

I realize he beat Vitali. But he did lose just about every round yeah.

no he didn't.

[JeanPaulValley]

[quote=McGrain;14327244]

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 "bullshit" 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 dick 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.

-Fans, Welcome 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

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

#1 You do realize that fans are considered ringside observers?

You know what i'm asking for and you cannot produce it. Tells its own story about you as a poster.

You do realize that fans chanting "bullshit" when the decison is announced is a sure sign that the wrong man won?

You do realise that most "ringside observers" has Lewis winning clearly, including AP, who had it 116-113?

You do realise that Holyfield was an American hero and that Lewis was fighting in a foriegn country?

You do realise that Lewis landed no fewer than sixty more punches than Holyfield by compubox?

Again, i'm completely unsurprised that you are saying Holyfield beat Lewis in the second fight because you're incapable of seeing it any other way.

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."

"We all knew it" Then why did "we" tune in in record numbers? Why did "we" demand the fight happen?

Of course Tyson was not prime. But, for the third time, he was ranked #2 in the world, the boxing public absolutely demanded it and for it not to happen would have been almost unthinkable. But you don't consider all of that because you like to cherry pick your facts.

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 no idea why you have a personal prejudice but it is absolutely blatant, as blatant as any i've seen on here.

And it is not what you take into account, but the possibilities you exclude that paint you as ridiculous.

Consider this: lots of people telling you you are a troll. It's likely.

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?

Yeah, they had a prejudice. The press always has a prejudice against "boxing" heavyweight champions rather than sluggers. This has been true of Tunney, Ali, Holmes, Lewis and now Wlad.

But I don't mind. Show me the one-hundred articles please.

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?

"Other people" don't take this attitude to Lewis. Yours is the most extreme viewpoint i've come across, ever.

-Fans

, Welcome 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

These aren't links - you're just typing titles Bet these magazines have seen a lot of "action" though.

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

You know what i'm asking for and you cannot produce it. Tells its own story about you as a poster.



You do realise that most "ringside observers" has Lewis winning clearly, including AP, who had it 116-113?

You do realise that Holyfield was an American hero and that Lewis was fighting in a foriegn country?

You do realise that Lewis landed no fewer than sixty more punches than Holyfield by compubox?

Again, i'm completely unsurprised that you are saying Holyfield beat Lewis in the second fight because you're incapable of seeing it any other way.







"We all knew it" Then why did "we" tune in in record numbers? Why did "we" demand the fight happen?

Of course Tyson was not prime. But, for the third time, he was ranked #2 in the world, the boxing public absolutely demanded it and for it not to happen would have been almost unthinkable. But you don't consider all of that because you like to cherry pick your facts.













I have no idea why you have a personal prejudice but it is absolutely blatant, as blatant as any i've seen on here.

And it is not what you take into account, but the possibilities you exclude that paint you as ridiculous.

Consider this: lots of people telling you you are a troll. It's likely.



Yeah, they had a prejudice. The press always has a prejudice against "boxing" heavyweight champions rather than sluggers. This has been true of Tunney, Ali, Holmes, Lewis and now Wlad.

But I don't mind. Show me the one-hundred articles please.



"Other people" don't take this attitude to Lewis. Yours is the most extreme viewpoint i've come across, ever.

[i]

These aren't links - you're just typing titles Bet these magazines have seen a lot of "action" though.

You want the links too? Goddamn you're a lazy cocksucker aren't you?
Do your own research scumbag I think we're done here. You were obviously rather entertained by our little discussions and it's safe to say that you have been soundly defeated. Trying to attack me with the insults of a 13 year old boy! Ha my man you have given nothing but your own opinion where I have supported my claims with actual facts from experts. Even some people in the British press share my claims.
It's over here. You're just not in my league junior! I give you facts,you say "no." I give you Emmanuel Steward's quotes and you say "no."
You've been stopped by a TKO6. You were taking some serious leather and like Lewis, only answering with a pawing jab and the occasional bear hug. It's ova and it's ova!

Lummox "the vulture" Lewis=glass jaw cherry picking fraud.

I wish you happy holidays and may God bless you.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by JeanPaulValley

You want the links too? Goddamn you're a lazy cocksucker aren't you?
Do your own research scumbag I think we're done here.

proper little tantrum.

What I want is for you to respond to the poinst that are actually put to you rather than completely ignoring them. Yes, it is normal on the forum for people to back up their asertations -for example, you say that "other people" feel as you feel about Lewis, then you type a list of article title as proof. Of course, this constitutes no proof.

You say Mercer was robbed against Lewis. I reprint my scorecard, re-produce the punchstats (heavily weighed to Lewis). No response.

Holyfield II, the same.

In other words you take very extreme positions then refuse to defend them. I'm hardly alone in finding that unsatisfactory.

You were obviously rather entertained by our little discussions and it's safe to say that you have been soundly defeated.

good god.

It's over here. You're just not in my league junior! I give you facts,you say "no."

I don't think you've produced facts in this thread, if i'm honest. I think you've produced a skewed opinion, and re-typed some article titles. That's the same thing.

I give you Emmanuel Steward's quotes and you say "no."

This is an outright lie. I responded to both of your Emmanuel Steward quotes, once with a another Emmanuel Steward quote and once by saying that I agreed (That prime Tyson was gone).

You, on the other hand, completely ignroe the Emmanuel Steward quote I produced. You didn't even say "no".

[JeanPaulValley]

Originally Posted by McGrain

proper little tantrum.

What I want is for you to respond to the poinst that are actually put to you rather than completely ignoring them. Yes, it is normal on the forum for people to back up their asertations -for example, you say that "other people" feel as you feel about Lewis, then you type a list of article title as proof. Of course, this constitutes no proof.

You say Mercer was robbed against Lewis. I reprint my scorecard, re-produce the punchstats (heavily weighed to Lewis). No response.

Holyfield II, the same.

In other words you take very extreme positions then refuse to defend them. I'm hardly alone in finding that unsatisfactory.



good god.




I don't think you've produced facts in this thread, if i'm honest. I think you've produced a skewed opinion, and re-typed some article titles. That's the same thing.



This is an outright lie. I responded to both of your Emmanuel Steward quotes, once with a another Emmanuel Steward quote and once by saying that I agreed (That prime Tyson was gone).

You, on the other hand, completely ignroe the Emmanuel Steward quote I produced. You didn't even say "no".

You want me to do all the work here. I already know the truth about Lummox,if you want to find something YOU should look it up. 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! What a dick! I tried to play by your rules but you just keep asking the same questions. I could give you a signed document by Lewis himself and then you would say "but do you have a blood sample?"

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


Top Rank matchmaker Carl Moretti had this to say about Lummox:

"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."

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."


Lennox Lewis is delusional as always. Lewis has gotten even less humble in his ways. Ali and Joe Louis weren't beaten by average fighters and they certainly weren't beaten by Rahman and McCall by (T)KO.
Ali was stopped once,late in his career,on his feet by Larry Holmes. Holmes was considerably better than anyone Lewis faced.
And Joe Louis was past his prime when he was KO'd by the great Marciano. Schmelling beat Joe Louis but Schmelling as also a very good fighter and world champion. No other heavyweight All time great was Ko'd twice in his prime by lesser fighters!

Hasim Rahman was the epitome of average. He once went 3 years without a single win!

And Lewis talks about avenging defeats.
He avenged defeats against the drug addicted Oliver McCall who was under house arrest.

He didnt rematch the guys who were hard fights like Mercer or Vitali Klitschko. Weird huh? Yeah Lummox Lewis was an overrated cherry picking bum.

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

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2-aY26Z8ns[/ame]

[juice20]

[quote=JeanPaulValley;14326919]

Originally Posted by ushvinder

Vitali was leading on all scorecards! This is a fact look it up.

Meaningless. Last I checked, to win a decision you need to finish the fight. Nobody wins a decision after 6 rounds, and untold numbers of fighters have comeback in the second half of fights to win....it happens all the time. The whole up on the scorecards nonsense means absolutely nothing. The momentum had swung by the 6th. Vitaly was damaged so badly that continuing could have ended his career. He did well. He lost. This scenario is nothing new....it happens. Why the hell does this one fight get beaten to death. He lost, and if he was allowed to continue, he likely would have lost. No experience going into deep waters in championship fights, where lewis had it. Both looked gassed, but klit was hurt and gassed.