Lennox Lewis. Does he have some holes in his legacy?

You are the one that doesn't seem to understand anything about the subject. You've probably learned more from me in the past few days than you would care to admit.

I don't see how I can be wrong given the ESPN poll was a real thing.

Why do you care about Lewis' comments, you admitted he was a liar in the other thread on the subject when you ran into contradictions trying to make the excuses stick.

And here's what the Telegraph said:

Byrd's style was the reason why WBC heavyweight champion Lennox Lewis, who was at ringside doing commentary, opted to take 1million US dollars and a sport utility vehicle from Don King to vacate the IBF belt.

Maxboxing said the same thing:

My style is unique," Byrd, now 36-2, told MaxBoxing.com weeks before this fight. "When I'm on top of my game, I get a little ****y because no one can touch me, no one can beat me."
This is why Holyfield said he did not want to fight Byrd. This is why many assume Lennox Lewis, the universally recognized heavyweight champion of the world, ditched his IBF belt rather than fight Byrd

What a humorous evolution. So originally, the claim was that Byrd wasn't in demand. When exposed as a falsehood, its now "not a popularity" contest? Ok. As far as business goes, 10 million dollars and a fight against the top American heavyweight you badmouthed>1 million dollars and a Rover to watch the top American Heavyweight and being forced to praise him on the commentary.

 

The thread should have ended after this.

However for the OP to say he has holes in his legacy because he didn't rematch Bruno or fight Ruiz, Byrd or Sanders (Grant was hyped up back then) is comical.

 

Care to mention how much Lewis got 6 months previously for fighting Tyson?

You know the biggest grossing Heavyweight fight in history. Only surpassed 5 years later by Mayweather / Oscar at L /Middle.

Shall we just say more than Byrd, and Holyfield combined, and leave it at that? Or is there some other aspect of your anti Lewis agenda you would like to persue?

 

Lennox Lewis's management team admitted than Rock Newman gave them at least one serious and good offer but they chose to stay with the WBC and the possibility of Don King promoted-Tucker fight.

Yes, they wanted "Foreman in China" and all that, so what ?
They obviously were saying they would fight who they want, when they want - and that may not be Lennox Lewis - but the fact is, they did not rule out Lewis at all .... and other parties (including Lewis's team, Don King and the WBC) contributed to the fight not being made.
It's strange that people still take such a one-sided view of it.

 

Yeah, I'm not saying Ferguson was a bum or anything.
I'm saying he's not far of the level of McCall.
I certainy don't think Holyfield should be recognized to have "missed McCall", or Ferguson either. :good

 

We are discussing legacy not "money made" by fighting the washed up but still charismatic superstar who hyped his final payday through the roof.

This doesn't excuse Lewis of the duck, its just a weak attempt at justifying it.

 

Answered this twice already.

 

Obviously Holyfield has the best heavyweight resume in the 1990s.
That's not even worthy of debate.

I'm not sure what "holes in legacy" actually means though.

 

And this my response to your "can't fight everybody" tag.

Lewis isn't criticized for not fighting everybody. He's criticized for missing specific top guys, vacating belts in the face of deserving mandatories, and yes, not delivering the rematch he promised at the end of his career.

 

That simply isn't true.

Newman wanted to split the 32 million for the Lewis / Bowe fight 90% - 10% in Bowe's favour. Maloney ( Lennox manager at that time ) rejected this contemptuously.

They then offered Lewis 2 million to fight on a Bowe undercard. Maloney laughed this off, on the basis of the first offer being so ridiculous Newman probably didn't have a pot to pi.s.s in and therefore could not be trusted.

 

Check my previous post, i said Holyfield should not be penalised in any way for not fighting the likes of Morrison, Mcall and Bruno when he beat their conquerors in Douglas, Mercer and Tyson.

He could have fought Ruddock in 91 but opted for old foreman instead. That's probably the only critisicm i have of Holyfield.

 

Holes in legacy is just an excuse to undermine a certain fighters record. Its just not always possible to fight EVERYONE in your era.

Tyson is known for clearing out his era in the mid to late 80s, but what do people say instead? "Oh he ducked Witherspoon and Page"

Holyfield should be exempt from any critiscm in terms of who he fought, yes he missed Bruno, Mcall, Ruddock, Morrison, Golota etc but if you look a bit further up the food chain, Holyfield has victories over guys who beat these men, this is not just a case of one or two fighters, its a whole load of them.

 

So are you trying to say that there weren't more deserving challengers than Foreman and Bean out there? You know that's nonsense.

 

He might well have, but I certainly think it's worthy of debate.

He has some great wins during this decade, but came worse off against both Bowe and Lewis and was only 1-1 with Moorer.

Lewis only has one defeat (avenged) during this decade and numerous wins over contenders, two of them over Evander himself (if you call the first one a draw, the discussion ends here).

So of course a very strong case can be made for Lewis, as well.

 

No, I said Lewis is not being criticized for "not fighting everybody"

Do you see anybody in this thread giving Lewis trash over the Markovic or Botha fights when there was possibly more deserving challengers available? No.

This reads like an overreaction deflection from the actual points being brought up.