Wlad Has Now Gone Longer Than Lennox Lewis Ever Did Between Losses

Those of us who actually followed Lewis's career through the 1990s, and don't succumb to rose-tinted revisionism, will remember that Lewis dominated a fairly average crop of contenders too.

His opposition was better than Wlad's, but not much better.

Mavrovic, Briggs, McCall, Akinwande, Grant, Golota, Morrison, Botha, Tua, Mercer ...... let's not get carried away pretending these were super fighters.

Holyfield was by far the best Lewis faced, and he was actually a few years past his best.

 

Ibragimov beat Briggs too.... EASILY. You are on a ****in' roll today.:rofl

You have Briggs better than Ibragimov....
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmQY7MfX5vU[/ame]

You said that Tua is better than Byrd...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FNVvuSss6Q&feature=related[/ame]


One of my favorites... you said Grant is better than McCline...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEND7JboT7M[/ame]

You are a boxing god. :rofl

 

Lewis' was maybe a little better, but not much...

today's division isn't as terrible as people make it out to be...

Klitschko's reign has been completely dominate, he is a great champion...

He deserves respect...

 

----

Wlad can now compete with Lennox in the way they both dominated the division. Only Louis and Holmes can beat them in this department. You could also mention Jack Johnson in here, but I think Johnson's reign sucked.

Lennox has a better resume than Wlad because of one thing: the win over Evander Holyfield.

 

Eddie Chambers is small but he still looked pretty good until he ended up in the ring with Wlad.

Samuel Peter hade several violent KO wins before he was fed to the brothers.

And Haye has always been looking good in the ring, until July the 2th.

Wlad looked like crap when he lost against Sanders, Brewster and Purrity, and his style today looks catious. But what the hell can his opponents do, the way he uses his fotwork and relentless jab?

 

Give me a break with this crap!

Even a blind man can tell the level of comp. of today vs the level that Lennox fought at...isnt much better but still was more competitive than today's state at the division.

as stated...lennox's era wasnt that much better but still its above the state of the division today.

 

Wait ten years to see how very tough our weak era is....I heard the haters vs Lennox state the same arguments....same was said against Ali only it was the '30's that was used in the mid to late '50's was rather weak except for four or five folks after the Rock.
Tyson's era was also out side of a couple of fighters considered weak. Now it Aint.



I think the problem is one remembers only the good fights and forgets all the rest....and just a couple of years ago Peter was indeed the Nigerian Nightmare, then he was 'exposed' against the elete.

Hard to think of an era as being good when Ellis had a belt....ain't it.
Or when Holms refused to Unify...
Holms era was very weak...except for a couple of fighters....Ali had beaten most, some he didn't fight....and his kiddy parade.

Tell you what though Tex Cobb would be tough in any era, and he was funnier than most Los Vegas comedians.

 

well it pretty much was...

 

This:deal

 

This kind of puts things in perspective !

 

One thing you can say about Lewis is that he never fought a slick and elusive fighter.

 

Dead on the money :thumbsup

 

:rofl:good