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

I agree.

I don't rate Lewis's opposition as high as some here seem to, and have never really heard a good explanation from them as to why they revere his opposition so much.

 

Louis-Walcott
Holyfield-Tyson
Schmeling-Louis
Foreman-Moorer
Holmes-Mercer
Ali - several wins
Dempsey-Sharkey

... there's more but those will do.

I'm not even sure how "past prime" Lewis was for Vitali.
I think he was past his best, and I assume some people think he was even further past his best.
He did actually look in his prime for the Rahman rematch though, just 18 months earlier, but he might have declined a lot after the Tyson fight I guess.

I don't count "title fights" necessarily.
Because paper titles exist and often title-holders choose to fight weak challengers.
Tommy Burns is high up on title fight wins, and Sam Langford has NONE.
Again, "ranked" means what ? listed in a magazine or something. I prefer to make my own judgement on how good the fighters were at the relevant time.
A lot seems to rest on this win over this Vitali character.

 

Of course, I have been saying that Lewis IS worthy of being inside the top 10, or just outside it.
But I don't have a list set in stone.
Someone else might have one set in stone and have him at #11 or #12 and I don't think anyone should get mystified by that.

 

LOL, this is going 30 pages with every Lewis excuse in the book.............professional internet debaters who never set foot in a ring, sparring camp or sat ringside or close in a HWY title or top contender fight.

Lennox Lewis is not a bum, period, he is a skilled large heavyweight with a lot of pride...........but he manged himself very carefully thru his career against threats, so he did have great timing when he eventually faced some of them and no matter what his fanatical apologists are trying to spin, he, Pepe, Emanuel etc knew his achilles heal, the chin , all along.

As far as wearing the cup up to his nipples, well, Pepe was convinced that Lemmie was soft in the body, as his ex trainer he probably knew a thing ot two and even advised Dope addict Butler to employ bodywork in their encounter when he was Butlers corner man, naturally you cant make a pig fly and Butler definetly did not fly....

 

I think more than a few of us have done all the above.

Managers are paid to manage. Highest reward for lowest risk. Johnson was no different. Dempsey no different. Louis had soft touches. Holmes missed his share of guys. Bowe ducked his best challenge after beating Holy.

I don't think Lenny's chin was his greatest problem so much as motivation and laziness. Hanging on the ropes and putting your chin on a tee for Rahman to blast at is not the best approach. But when you've spent more time partying on the set of Oceans 11 than training, **** like that happens. And that his on Lewis, not an excuse. He prepared poorly and lacked professionalism at a point in his career where he should have embodied it.

L Train was a sawed-off, stumpy heavyweight, going to the body was a natural strategy. I am trying to remember someone who really visibly hurt Lewis to the body... Holyfield?

 

They didn't. It is just yet another sad attempt by his critics to disparage the guy.

 

Care to put your credentials up, and let some of the other posters compare?

 

Prime Bowe would have blasted those two versions of Holyfield away in about 6 rounds. Evander just din't have the energy or power to prevent himself taking a beat down.

But Prime Lewis goes a tepid 24 rounds winning a boring points decision.
That tells me everything I need to know about him and his 'greatness'.

 

I'd definitely dispute some of those, but some are quite sound so let's leave it at that

No one criteria is enough on its own, that's why I named a bunch of them. If you have both a high number of wins in title fights and wins over ranked opposition, chances are that most of the challengers you beat were ranked, no? As it de facto is in Lewis's case.

But out of curiosity, which of the ranked fighters that Lewis beat don't you think deserved to be ranked and which should have been ranked instead?

As for the win over Vitaly, as a pure W in the column, not looking at the dominance of it, I think it's probably better than anything single win Holy has, in his prime or after it. I think I'd have a prime, well prepared Vitaly over both a prime but not well prepared Bowe and a post prime Tyson.

So, yeah, a high number of wins over ranked contenders and in title fights (often in dominating performances) and a post prime win over someone like Vitaly goes quite a long way in my book. Wins over prime Bowe and younger versions of Holy and Tyson would have made his resume stronger, of course, but then we're talking about top 3 material.

 

To be fair, Lewis won the fights, and that was just his style I guess.
There are probably a few other great fighters who won their big fights in boring manner.

But I admit I've always had the same feeling to some extent.
I was actually very surprised when I first saw posts on this forum building up the Lewis-Holyfield wins as somehow more convincing or significant than Bowe's wins over Evander ... there's even a few people who will say Holyfield was a better fighter for Lewis.

 

I don't have the definitive list of who the "ranked" ones were.

And off the top of my head, I would say men like Shannon Briggs, Mavrovic, Mason, McCall (second fight), Morrison, Botha, Phil Jackson, Tyrell Biggs were NOT ranked at the time - or didn't deserve to be - or maybe a couple of those are borderline cases at best.

I'm not sure Mercer was ranked going in to the fight with Lewis. If he was it would be purely on the strength of losing a close decision to an already declining Holyfield.

Then there's a guy like Tony Tucker, who might have warranted a top 10 ranking, but was strictly a washed-up protected entity on the clear downslide (and had been lucky to get decisions against Norris and McCall).

Lionel Butler, another borderline case, and proved himself a bum by not training one bit for Lewis.

Golota was ranked high, and that was dubious, seeing as his ranking was based on two fights he got DQ'd in.

Tyson's alleged #1 status was a joke.

Men like Bruno, Tua, Vitali, and even Akinwande and Grant, were the more valid, still 'live' challengers, perhaps. Ruddock, although overrated, probably deserved to be hanging on to a high ratings.

Of course, people will say "you can do this to any resume", but I'd counter that it's valid in every case, and that it's especially valid when people are constantly repeating that this was some sort of amazing resume in a VERY STRONG ERA.
For such a "superior era" I see a lot of washed-up and otherwise thinly-qualified heavyweights being called ranked contenders.

 

I'm not sure what was so good about Vitali going in to the Lewis fight.
It could easily be argued that he GREW as a fighter AFTER the Lewis fight (and even to this day, his resume is a little lacking).

Don't get me wrong, Vitali IS a good win, he was a good challenger. But there seems to be some revisionism going on.

 

Unforgiven...you make some valid points about the strength of many of Lennoxs opponents in individual terms/ yes i get where you are coming from.
However i think the strength of Lennox's resume is the sheer number of guys he beat over such a long period/punctuated by some real legitimate threats along the way/ Lennox kept himself fit and together for an awfully long time , without any 'issues' away from the ring or decline in his standards.
I've said many times before, his career just lacked that career defining win....probably somewhere in the mid nineties..Bowe would've been ideal ..or Tyson/ both fights i believe Lennox would've won.

 

Well, I agree 100% that his entire rating should/does stand on his consistency and longevity.
(I think that's true of Wlad Klitschko also.)
I'm just sceptical as to whether it qualifies him for these very high (top 3, top 5 all-time HW) ratings that so many people are INSISTING on.

 

Yes, you can do that to every resume. Holy's for example

Dokes, Foreman and Holmes were all well past it. Bert who? Douglas hadn't woken up from his nap when he came into the ring. Moorer's best HW win next to Holy was probably Steward. Still he's 1-1 with Holy.

Yes, Holy managed to just edge a Bowe who hadn't trained, but lost clearly the other two times. The second Tyson win is in the end inconclusive, and the first one was of course clear but Tyson hadn't trained (so it's claimed) and was never the same after prison anyhow.

The times Holy stepped up against well prepared really good fighters who were in their prime (Lewis and Bowe 1) he lost clearly.

Doubtful he's even top 10.

See how easy that was?