Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-08-2008, 09:42 AM   #16
Unforgiven
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

There's no universal definition of what a fighter must or must not do to be an "all-time great".
Unforgiven is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 07-08-2008, 09:56 AM   #17
salsanchezfan
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain
Peak Williams would always have given peak Tyson very serious problems though, you must admit? Tyson is so small by comparison, and he's a poof.

salsanchezfan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:01 AM   #18
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 36,417
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Tyson IS a great fighter. But it seems unlikely to me that he would have done as well against Williams' competition as Williams did.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:07 AM   #19
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,212
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Lennox is an ATG. The answer is false. Can he be considered an elite -say, top 2 or 3? I'd say no. Nor do you get knocked out by B-Level fighters in your prime.

All Time Great? Yes. Elite? Nah.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:13 AM   #20
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 12,631
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

False..
mr. magoo is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:35 AM   #21
PaddyD1983
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 324
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marciano Frazier
False, but I do think the fact that those things both happened to him in his prime is a strong indication that he does not belong in the top five in the heavyweight division (where many have him these days).
False.

I would also say that the McCall loss was not during his prime. His prime years came after that and after teaming up with Manny Steward.

Regardless, both losses were avenged. For a heavyweight there is always a risk of a loss. Lewis proved himself by beating every man he fought.

Whether he is an ATG is another question in my opinion. I think it comes more down to resume rather than losses. In terms of skill set, I think Lewis was as accomplished as any other heavy with the exceptions of Ali and Louis (and maybe Tyson in his pomp). After that its all down to resume. Lewis beat everyone, but was that down to poor opposition? Well he had better opponents than possibly Larry Holmes and Tyson. So for me there is only really then Marciano and Liston that you can class above him (after Louis, Ali and possibly Tyson).

[I caveat this with the disclaimer that my pre-war knowledge isnt great so I know I'm missing out Dempsey, Johnson etc but I really dont have enough knowledge to compare them to a Lennox Lewis]

For me that puts Lewis in as an ATG. Personally I have him #4 behind Ali, Louis and Tyson
PaddyD1983 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 10:48 AM   #22
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 36,417
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Of course, it also hurts Mike that he lost twice to blown up Light-heavyweight Hollyfield, who doesn't reside in my ten, during his absolute physical peak.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:21 AM   #23
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 12,631
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Although the Rahman and McCall losses came during Lewis's prime, I don't think either of them occurred during his absolute peak. Sure, he was 29 years old, undefeated in 25 fights, and a two time olympian when he fought oliver McCall, but i do think that training with Manny Steward made him better. As for the Rahman loss, one could say that he was still the best heavyweight in the world, but at the age of 35 and nearing the end of his career, I wouldn't call this a peak version either.

In my opinion, Lewis's prime stretched from about 1992-2000, with his peak years coming probably between 1996-1999.
mr. magoo is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:24 AM   #24
PaddyD1983
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 324
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Although the Rahman and McCall losses came during Lewis's prime, I don't think either of them occurred during his absolute peak. Sure, he was 29 years old, undefeated in 25 fights, and a two time olympian when he fought oliver McCall, but i do think that training with Manny Steward made him better. As for the Rahman loss, one could say that he was still the best heavyweight in the world, but at the age of 35 and nearing the end of his career, I wouldn't call this a peak version either.

In my opinion, Lewis's prime stretched from about 1992-2000, with his peak years coming probably between 1996-1999.
I've never really differentiated between peak and prime, but this more accurately explains what I was trying to get at
PaddyD1983 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:31 AM   #25
prime
BOX! Writing Champion
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Guadalajara, Jal., Mexico
Posts: 1,229
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marciano Frazier
False, but I do think the fact that those things both happened to him in his prime is a strong indication that he does not belong in the top five in the heavyweight division (where many have him these days).
True.

That chin will forever prevent his entry into the pantheon of the elite, but, other than that, Lewis was an awesome boxer and a handful for any elite fighter.
prime is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:32 AM   #26
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 12,631
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaddyD1983
I've never really differentiated between peak and prime, but this more accurately explains what I was trying to get at
Agreed.

I know its kinda difficult to claim that Lewis wasn't in his prime against McCall. He was in his late 20's. He was unbeaten in 25 fights with wins over Ruddock, Tucker, Mason, Bruno and Jackson. He was a two time olympic medalist. To say that he wasn't prime is somewhat silly, however, as mentioned before, I do feel that he improved under the instruction of Steward.

On the otherhand, claiming that Lewis was peak against Rahman is somewhat on the ludicrous side. He was nearing the age of 36, and showing up to fights at career high weights. Frankly, i think a tad too much is made of the Rahman loss.
mr. magoo is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:35 AM   #27
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,603
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by prime
True.

That chin will forever prevent his entry into the pantheon of the elite, but, other than that, Lewis was an awesome boxer and a handful for any elite fighter.
If you are going to exclude Lennox Lewis from all time great status on the basis of his chin then a good few other historic fighters will get their credentials called into question.

Tommy Hearns to name but one.
janitor is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:36 AM   #28
Ezzard
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Lewis is an ATG champion who has flaws...

25 years ago Foreman was considered to be a greta fighter with flaws. he hardly ever did well in h2h match ups because the way to beat him was considered to be easy...simply get into the late rounds and his awful stamina would see him deflate fast... Any argument about Foreman always had this tilt to it. of course only Ali and Young (2 of the greatest boxer HWs) actually managed to do this.

Same with Lewis now. Close your eyes and throw a right hand and you'll probably knock him out. Okay the guys who did it weren't in Ali or Young's class but Lewis many top punchers over his career.

I think between 5-10 is a defendable position for Lennox
Ezzard is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:38 AM   #29
PaddyD1983
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 3,467
vCash: 324
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Agreed.

I know its kinda difficult to claim that Lewis wasn't in his prime against McCall. He was in his late 20's. He was unbeaten in 25 fights with wins over Ruddock, Tucker, Mason, Bruno and Jackson. He was a two time olympic medalist. To say that he wasn't prime is somewhat silly, however, as mentioned before, I do feel that he improved under the instruction of Steward.

On the otherhand, claiming that Lewis was peak against Rahman is somewhat on the ludicrous side. He was nearing the age of 36, and showing up to fights at career high weights. Frankly, i think a tad too much is made of the Rahman loss.
At HW losses come with the territory for me. He proved himself against everyone he fought. Was linear champion for a long stretch and nobody looked like interrupting his dominance. Even after his losses he was favourite to win the rematches which showed that at the time people thought of them as 'flukes'.

As for the prime/peak thing, as I say I've never really explained it like that (or even heard it put like that) before. It makes a lot more sense when you say it that way, otherwise I'm limiting Lewis's 'prime' to about a two year stretch which doesnt really do him justice. Thanks
PaddyD1983 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 11:44 AM   #30
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 12,631
vCash: 1000
Default Re: True Or False?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaddyD1983
At HW losses come with the territory for me. He proved himself against everyone he fought. Was linear champion for a long stretch and nobody looked like interrupting his dominance. Even after his losses he was favourite to win the rematches which showed that at the time people thought of them as 'flukes'.

As for the prime/peak thing, as I say I've never really explained it like that (or even heard it put like that) before. It makes a lot more sense when you say it that way, otherwise I'm limiting Lewis's 'prime' to about a two year stretch which doesnt really do him justice. Thanks
I think he's definately top 10. On any given day, I can have him rated anywhere from #5-#8. The losses hurt him a tad, but I think people place way too much emphasis on them. The man defeated more ranked contenders than most champions did, and often did so in decisive fashion. He unified his title and beat a lot of big punchers in their primes, and plenty of guys with good records. He also left the sport on a winning note, and against a very good fighter.
mr. magoo is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013