Best cherry pickers of all time.

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 ****ed 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:

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/20heavyweights.html

Or how about SportsRatings who have him at #8?

http://www.sports-ratings.com/fights/heavyweight-boxing-top-100-alltime-peak-rating.html

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

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=156253


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 ****ing ******ed? 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:

 

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

 

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...

 

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 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.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

"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 ****ing 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.