What would Lewis have done if he was in Wlad's shoes last night?

Well he did in the McCall fight. Both threw punches at about the same time and McCall's landed first. Up to that point, Lewis was winning comfortably.

 

Apparently, he's so awestruck about Wlad that he's lost complete perspective, cause pretty much everyone on this thread agrees with your comments.

 

Lewis would't have given it away so timidly. Wlad, for all his physical gifts never sat down and brawled it out. Much more a safety first fighter who wouldn't engage until he beat his opponent down. Lewis in more than one fight brawled with his opponent and engaged in physically sapping bouts.

 

If you believe Fury is on par with Michael Grant circa 2000 then you might like to think Lewis would deal with him, even the 2003 version. But let's be honest, Fury now is appreciably better than Grant was in 2000.

 

Only because most of this board hates Wlad, like most hated Lewis when he was active.

 

Very brave of Lewis to get knocked out like that.....the definition of going out on your shield.

 

What does this rant have to do with my point?

Rematches now? Rahman 2 is the only rematch between the two that really revenged a defeat, and who knows..maybe we'll see something like that next year, but I'm certainly not going to pretend the Brewster and McCall rematches were something they weren't. But that's because I'm more balanced and you are being exposed more and more as a fanboy.

Sorry, if I continue to make points you cant refute, and you have to rant like this. You take solace in knowing
The usual choir agrees with you, regardless of me stumping you continuously.

Nah, nobody who gets off the canvas to win a fight can be said lacking in fighting spirit...whatever that really means. He has shown lots of resolve in his career, as just about every fighter who reached the apex has had to do.
.

 

Hates a relative term. I think if I were ranking him, I'd have him anywhere between 9-15. That's hate if you think he's top 3 but it's not hate if you think he doesn't crack the top 20.

But that doesn't mean he didn't lack a warriors mentality, he clearly did.

But that aside he had excellent skills in terms of controlling distance, and power in both hands, particularly his left hook.

He reminds me a bit of Mayweather, content to win fights while taking as little risk as possible.

That works, if you're always ahead in fights, not so much if you're behind. And it's not the best way to market the heavyweight boxing champion of the world.

 

What is going out on your shield mean if not going out punching?

 

Bad comparison. Mayweather actually dug deep when the going got tougher and he couldn't just depend on his skills to win. He did that against, Cotto, Hatton, and Maidana 1.

 

Warrior mentality is a worthless phrase.

No, he didn't take lots of risks against Fury. But he is a 40 year old man against a physically superior fighter, so I wouldn't expect him to fight like Marciano and volume punch until something lands. Fury was making him miss, so he conversed himself until the late rounds..didn't work, Fury stayed composed and didnt buckle. Thars all there is to it, nothing to do with bravery.

 

He got countered in a two round fight with little action.

Can basically say that of any knockout when the term usually is more specific to brave last stand type losses in helpless situations...

 

And Povetkin, what's his excuse for that fiasco? And after you answer that, I'll pull out another name, and then another one. You sure like defending the indefensible.

 

I think if you're trying to win the fight, and you're throwing punches with bad intention, then to me, if you get caught you're gone out on your shield. Others may have a different interpretation of what that means, but that's my interpretation.

 

This is pretty nonsensical. Do you agree or disagree with my observation regarding the Fury fight, and let's go from there.

Not sure why you and Sugar fall apart like this when confronted with a clear point.