Rid**** Bowe vs Lennox Lewis in 1993

And yet, Lewis kept Ruddock under control with his jab, using it quite emphatically to set up the first-round KD. He did the same thing again, against Tucker, using his jab to measure an overhand right to score the third-round KD.

Suffice to say, I disagree with the view that Lewis had no jab in '93. Quite oppositely, the Lewis jab was sufficient enough to cause Bowe problems; in the main, because of what followed it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Lewis.

 

Ruddock had no jab at all to speak of. Just a go for broke round house punch. You can't argue he'd match Bowe for jabs based off that fight.

Lewis looked silly against Tucker. He should have been able to put a shot Tucker away but couldn't.

Pierre Coetzer would have beaten that Tucker no problem.

 

All Steward did was get Lewis to be more consistent with the jab, he always had the jab, just like he always had the right hand and the uppercut. Steward didn't add any of these to Lewis repertoire he simply refined their use.

Watch his fights with Mason, Ruddock, Tucker, Jackson etc, the jab is clearly evident, he's inconsistent with it but it's clearly there and when he threw it, it was the same dominant jab we saw him throw more consistently post Steward. So no you are clearly wrong the video evidence is there to prove Lewis had the jab even back then.

I never said Lewis dominated Biggs with his jab I simply said he completely took away the effectiveness of Biggs jab with his ability to cut distance and slip inside his jab. This was something Bowe was incapable of doing against Biggs, Biggs could barely miss with his jab. Sure Bowe has plenty of success with the jab as well, both of them did, the truth is neither could slip a good jab.

In a battle of jabs Lewis could slip Bowe's but Bowe couldn't consistently slip Lewis' and that would see Lewis win the battle of jabs.

 

So Lewis won a gold metal at the Olympics fighting under a style which is essentially geared towards accumulating points and yet he never had a jab.

I never knew that.

That's why this classic section is so interesting, you learn something new every day.

 

I have neither argued that Ruddock had a jab to speak of nor that Lewis would match (or even need to match) Bowe for jabs. I have questioned your contention that Lewis had no jab in '93.

I'm certain Lewis did have a jab - before and during '93 - and used it to great effect, setting up big right hands (amongst other kinds of assault), as evidenced in both the Ruddock and Tucker fights (and plenty of other fights prior to those two, I strongly suspect).

In any event, I doubt a fight between Lewis and Bowe would have been decided purely by their respective jabs - and would more likely have depended on the relative versatility of each Boxer, at that time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

LOL@ Lewis not having a jab in 93.

 

This is nonsense. What does an early learning fight with Biggs have to do with a Lewis fight later on.

Go look at Holyfield throw the best jab he ever threw in his life against Bowe in the rematch. And watch Holyfied be completely out jabbed and kept on the outside.

While Bowe was out classing one of the best heavies to ever step into the ring , Lewis was a crumpled heap on the canvas against a fringe contender.

Bowe would have nothing to slip against Lewis cos Lewis wouldn't throw a jab against a jabber. Bowes jab was 10x better than the jab of Bruno's.

 

Foreman in the Jackson fight. - The man simply doesn't know how to jab

The forum armchair warrior >>> George Foreman

 

The fights with Biggs have plenty of relevance, you can choose to dismiss it to fit your point of view but that doesn't change the reality of it.

Both fought Biggs in the same year and it showed where both men were at that stage in their careers. Bowe struggled, was rocked twice and only a single round up on 2 scorecards when the KO came, while Lewis just mauled Biggs and battered him in 3 rounds for a quick stoppage.

Bringing up the Holyfield rematch really doesn't help your argument. Holyfield fights nothing like Lewis, has a far weaker outside game and even then Holyfield had some success out boxing Bowe. Look at what happened when Lewis used his jab against Evander in their fights, he dominated the first fight with it and dominated the rounds in the rematch when he used it more, Bowe was never able to be so dominate with his jab like that in all 3 of his fights with Evander.

When Lewis was being humbled by McCall, Bowe was looking far from classy having lost to Holyfield and the month before luckily not being disqualified for hitting Buster Mathis Jr while down.

Why wouldn't he jab with a jabber? He was being out jabbed by Vitali and apart of his turnaround was to step in with his jab, so clearly an example of jabbing with a jabber, he jabbed with Tucker, he jabbed with plenty of fighters and usually came out on top.

What makes you think his jab was better than Bruno's, just because you say so doesn't make it true. That's pure speculation on your part, what fights against the same opposition with Bruno prove this idea of yours?

 

As much as I respect and love Foreman as a boxer he was a terrible commentator and said some stupendously stupid things over the years, like when during Hopkins/Tito he was saying Hopkins was tiring.

But then he also said Lewis was the best heavyweight of all time so clearly he was right sometimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV5AMRL5-Hc

 

10 x better remember!! atsch

 

I'd hate to live and die on comments boxers have come up with over the years hahaha

 

First you say Lewis had no jab, then when proof comes up, he has a jab because of who he fought

 

I stand corrected 10 x better, I apologise for my inaccuracy.

Of course this mean Golota must of had a jab 100 times better than Bruno as Golota jabbed Bowe's head off. Which of course means Golota was winning the battle of the jabs in his fight with Lewis because Golota's jab must have been 200 times better than Lewis as Dino is certain Bowe had the better jab. Golota was clearly robbed. :nut