The 90s was the 2nd Best HW era..shouldn't Lennox be a Top 3 ATG

I am not certain that the 90s was the second best heavyweight era to be honest.

Foreman and Holmes spoiled the party a bit, in terms of that argument.

 

Much as I love the 90s, like you say, janitor, it's a taint on the era that Foreman and Holmes were so competitive at the age they were. But it was probably still the 2nd best era, imo.

 

I don't have a problem calling it the 2nd best era, in fact except of the upper echelons of the last 60's and the early 70's, I might even call it the best era in terms of overall depth. And as far as Foreman and Holmes go I think an older Foreman at least, would be competitive in any era given his power and durability.

 

It's a very good era in terms of depth but you can't call Lewis a top 3 atg based on that

 

U wot ?

 

I liked the Holyfield-Bowe trilogy but don't think much of the 1990s as a "great era".

Mercer, Morrison, Bruno, Botha, McCall, Hide etc.
I don't think were anything special.

 

Some great fighters in the 90's, but the era wasn't good at all. To many fights that didn't happen or happened way to late.

 

I both agree and disagree with some of the proposed notions. Yes the 90's was an excellent era in terms of raw talent.. You had about 4-5 ATG's who fought during the same period a few of whom were prime. You had a great trilogy with Holyfield and Bowe along with several memorable battles in the lower ranks of the division. But a lot of the bigger fights were either never made or simply made too late.. You had two 40 plus year old ex champs on the comeback trail who both breached the top 10 and one of them even captured the lineal title. You had a light heavyweight and a cruiserweight who competed in an era of superheavyweights, yet both won titles and one of them became the eras best fighter.. You had three of the biggest upsets in history during that period, i.e. Tyson vs Douglas, Lewis vs McCall and Foreman vs Moorer. You had men like McCall, Ruiz, Douglas, Seldon, etc winning titles. So Basically the talent was there but it existed in "pocket's" and wasn't always well manifested while lesser or older fighters were permitted to thrive. As for Lennox Lewis being top 3? I suppose an argument can be made. I have him at #5 however.

 

Lennox is in my top 3. The only problem I have with him is suspect chin vs punchers.

 

Top 3 heavyweights don't go down like over protected girls via one big shot to the face. Sorry

 

The 70's were sh*t after Zaire, Ali defending against a succession of Eurobums and losing to Neon Leon. And I while I consider it compelling, I don't think two shot fighters pummeling each other in Manilla counts as greatness.


The 90's were the greatest and deepest era in the division's history.

 

I get that, but Lewis fought plenty of punchers. More than anyone else, perhaps save Ali.

Yes--Lewis can get whacked, but it only happened twice and he avenged both losses.

Ali was outboxed more than twice. I can't see Lewis losing to Norton or Fraizer, can you?

 

they actually do.