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

Well, I'm happy to keep Charles at 190 and save all the added speculation.
I mean, there's enough speculation already.

Of course, we can say there's insufficient proof to credit Charles with any sort of chance against any decent/good never mind GREAT fighter upwards of 220 or 225.
That's fair.

But if we imagine a world where he had no choice, like an old school thing, like when Gunboat Smith had to fight Jess Willard or whatever ... I have some faith in Charles at least being able to emulate the chances I'd give Chris Byrd, lack or bulk or not.
That's just my hunch.

And I do reserve the right to point out that smaller fighters, though at an OBVIOUS disadvantage, do often in fact pose different puzzles, due to speed and mobility and presenting such a limited target .... and that Lewis's style was almost entirely untested against smaller, slick, speedy, skillful fighters.
For what it's worth.
For me, it makes it interesting anyway. :good

 

Yes we get you don't care for Lewis and yes he did have his protector too high .Is he the only boxer to do so and if not why don't the commissions do something about it?

 

I can think of numerous fighters, if not all, who will try and get away with anything the ref let's them. Holyfield headbutted, Tyson has been known to try and break someone's arm, Ali use to grab fighters behind the head and pull them down, Foreman use to push fighters back, hell it's an endless list. So I blame the ref's for any illegal activities that they over look. Certainly when Lewis fought Tyson, Cotton was all over Lewis and even deducted a point.

And I agree the punch Lewis landed on Grant was pretty bad.

 

Well according to you, you're okay with the first Lewis-Holyfield fight being called a draw, so considering the source I'm not surprised that you consider Lewis's actions illegal.

 

This desperate nitpicking of a resume that is easily top 5 or 6 in the division's history just reeks of agenda. When fools reach this far they reveal far more about themselves than the nominal focus of their attack.

 

At least the Michael Grant KO was just a lot of fouls. Yes, the referee should have done something, but maybe he just missed it, it happened fast and whatever ... Grant was probably going to get stopped anyway etc.
I mean, we can make sense of that.

The high protector in the Holyfield fight is just baffling. I don't know, perhaps it was the fashion in the late 90s. I seem to remember Holyfield in the first Tyson fight, and some other fighters, having quite high cups too at that time.
But Lewis took it to the most absurd possible level here. Very strange.

 

So ... How do come to your clear opinion that his resume is " easily top 5 or 6 in the division's history " without actually examining it ?

 

You're not making sense. You say he won the first fight comfortably and then call the official draw a stain on his legacy. The way I see it the official call is a stain on the sport of boxing, not Lewis' legacy. When virtually everyone who watched the fight have a similar score which was a one sided win for Lewis, then how is that a stain on his record?

You almost have to try and make **** up to come to that conclusion.

They fought twice and the combined score should have been about 16-8 for Lewis, and yet you see a hole in his legacy, simply because you want to, not be looking at what actually transpired.

 

I don't agree that Lewis should have blown Holyfield out, that's a complete dis to Holyfield's granite chin and warrior attitude. But he deserved the W and as I mentioned, my viewpoint is the stain lies more with the sport of boxing than with Lewis. That said, I would have liked it to be a more entertaining fight

I don't begrudge any kind of victory, whether it should have been a blow out but it wasn't doesn't matter as much as the results.

I think Wlad hugging Povetkin for a whole fight was a much worse "stain" then anything lewis ever did in the ring, but I still don't question the outcome of the fight, or who was the better fighter.
But I don't watch much of his fights as a result of this hugfest. Talk about someone who should have been disqualified or had points deducted, this is far worse that Lewis wearing a cup too high or Lewis not winning against Holyfield in the fashion some expected.

Yes the fight should have happened earlier but that's the politics of boxing, as opposed to one persons fault. The cup guard to me is on the ref. It's his job to say what's legal and what isn't. Same as when Vitali tried kicking Lewis, as he was helping him up. I suppose if I was desperate I could call that a stain, or I could take the view that in a boxing ring, **** happens.

 

Critical, intelligent examination is fine. What is better is actually watching the fights, knowing the fighters and understanding the era.

Labeling a Lewis "a bum" or trying to create holes where they don't exist is just agenda driven pablum.

 

Name them.

The Mercer fight was much closer on my cards, could have been a draw actually. Bruno was ahead before the stoppage and rocked Lewis several time, neither of which Holy succeeded with.

Seeing how Holy was well past his prime, I think he did very well on balance, but I don't think Lewis superiority ever was in question in any of the fights.

But if he's top 10 or even top 5 in things as title fights and wins against ranked competition, doesn't have losing record against anyone and has a win against prime Vitaly when himself past his prime, I see little reason to not hav him in the top 10.