Ruddock vs Lewis - 24yrs ago tonight, what are your thoughts on it?

Lewis bombed him. Ruddock was a little overrated, but Lewis was a destroyer type until he learned his chin was a bit suspect. That had not happened yet.

 

That's for sure.

 

Plenty of people were saying that regarding Cooney's opponents. Not everyone was fooled.

You've made things murky, but not murky enough, telling only half the story.

Noway on mother earth was my man Page in the top 10, not a chance.

Bonecrusher hadn't won a fight in his last 3, so let's not pretend he was top 10 either.

Weaver? Weaver was stopped inside of 1 round by Bonecrusher the fight before he lost a split decision over 10 to Ruddock. Do you really think he was top 10 going into the ruddock fight?

So 1 out of your claimed 4 was top 10.

 

Greg Page was definitely NOT top 10 when Ruddock fought him, unless one of the alphabet organization snuck him in there for the sake of promoting that fight. I'm not so sure about Smith. By the time he fought Ruddock in 1989, he hadn't recorded a win since 1986 and was 0-2-1 in his last three fights. Weaver is questionable but might have been ranked on the fringes. Michael Dokes is the only fighter who Ruddock beat who was a clear top 10 at the time of their meeting.

 

The fight that Bowe saw and thought 'no thanks, don't fancy any of that'

 

I agree that it had a huge impact on Bowe's decision to decline that fight. Bowe and the winner of Ruddock vs Lewis were more or less signed to fight each other in the event of a Bowe victory over Holyfield, before it even happened. Lewis goes out and destroys Ruddock in the most unexpected fashion and all of a sudden the WBC isn't worthy of the Bowe camp..

 

Ruddock had got confused both fighting a bigger Lewis because Ruddock did struggle with taller guys like Bone Crusher who was about 6'4 and his new trainer Floyd Patterson tried changing his style . He looked good in the previous fight against undefeatted Jackson because Jackson didnt throw any punches like Ruddock didnt throw against Lewis , he was a basically just displaying good foot work and head movement before getting clobbered . The Ruddock who fought Tyson would have stood his ground better and possibly landed a k.o punch but thats just speculating , because all the top guys that fought Tyson brought their A game , i do believe Tyson took some years out off of Ruddocks abilities ,people forget that Ruddock was really a 80's fighter whos mistake was bad management . Ruddock was probably at his peak against Tyson ,both mentally and physically ,he made reference to the Douglss loss as him being much stronger of a opponent ,you also dont go toe to toe with one of the most dangerous punchers ever twice and be overatted .

What the Lewis fight did show is the coming of a dangerous guy either way , Ruddock was no push over many chos e not to fight him and Lewis was the dominant 90's champion who i think would have defeated the same Ruddock Tyson fought by mid 90's . The punch that Lewis landed had much more leverage on it punching downwards to an open crouched Ruddock ,a flaw he never seemed to fix that the 6'5 83 inch reach Lewis's right hand took advantage of ,end of story.

 

I can't look up where they were all rated right now. Mike Weaver was rated third four months before the Ruddock fight when Weaver faced Bonecrusher. Weaver was stopped early. He no doubt fell in the rankings. My point is, these guys he beat were in the title picture. Bonecrusher had lost two of his last three before the Ruddock fight. One loss was a unification with Tyson. The other was a reported hometown decision to Adilson Rodriques, who became the WBA #2 contender based primarily on that split decision win over Smith. Losing a unification with Tyson and losing a hometown decision to a guy who then got a top ranking were the TWO losses. Again, Smith was still in the title picture. (Hell, both Smith and Weaver WERE STILL in the WBA title picture years AFTER losing to Ruddock when they fought on the undercard of Ruddock-Dokes.) Dokes was rated in the top five. Page was up and down depending on the month.

The point is, Ruddock had wins over four WBA heavyweight champs who were still in the title picture and he engaged in two high profile wars with Tyson. Ruddock was a solid top guy. Not "overrated."

If someone turned around right now and beat four former champs like Bermane Stiverne and David Haye and Shannon Briggs and Lucas Browne ... and then fought Anthony Joshua in two losing but exciting wars ... he'd probably be considered a top contender. Not overrated.

That's the point. Not their numeric ranking. Who gives a ****. They were in the title picture. And Ruddock earned his position and how he was viewed.

 

Weaver had no rating anywhere in the 90's. Smith was ranked at the bottom of one of the alphabet organzation's top 10 around the Ruddock Dokes fight for about two or three months after putting together a streak of wins over mediocrities.. I wouldn't exactly call this being in the title picture. Smith was 36 years of age against Ruddock, off for a whole year, a career high weight at the time, and hadn't won a fight since 1986. Was he ranked? Possibly, but being ranked #8 #9 #10 by just one alpha organization and none others isn't exactly a serious contender. Hell Mark Wills was ranked like #9 by the WBC in 1990 after sparking a shot Greg Page on the undercard of Whitaker vs Nelson. No way is such a rating to be taken seriously.

 

Are you really arguing this?

When Ruddock faced him, Smith had been the WBA heavyweight champion two years earlier. When Ruddock fought him, Weaver had fought for the title the previous year. They were in the picture.

Is David Haye a serious contender? When he wasn't fighting for three years, he wasn't ranked by anyone. When he announced he was fighting - even against a nobody - he immediately became a viable contender.

I was a fan at the time. Ruddock's wins over Dokes, Smith, Weaver and Page were significant wins just like someone knocking out Shannon Briggs and David Haye and Bermane Stiverne and Lucas Browne right now would be considered significant wins. They're former champs. They're still in the picture. Doesn't matter if everyone doesn't rate them. Doesn't matter if they aren't prime.

Ruddock wasn't overrated when Lewis fought him. Ruddock deserved his top rating. Which contenders deserved to be rated above Ruddock when Lewis fought him?

 

Ruddock deserved his rating yes, when contrasted to the landscape of the division at the time. Tyson was gone. Foreman hadn't beaten anybody recently. Bowe I believe might have been ranked above him depending on the organization but Its been years since I've seen those alphabet ratings. Think the WBC had Ruddock at #1. Holyfield was obviously lineal champion. In fairness Michael Dokes was a solid win over a legit contender who had been active on the scene. But that doesn't mean all those wins you listed were.. Weaver, Smith and Page were long past their best.. Weaver had lost two of his last three and one of them emphatically. Smith hadn't beaten anyone since 1986 when he fought Ruddock in 1989, and was off for a year besides. Inactivity and lack of recent acheivements can certainly effect rating as well as ability. They were good wins over "named" opponents. but sometimes the name belies actual quality. Tim Witherspoon was on a pretty good streak from late 1987 to 1992 and beat similar household names in Carl Williams and Jose Ribalta. Hell at an earlier point he had even beaten many of the same guys ruddock got credit for beating, with the only difference being that Tim beat them in their primes. But I didn't see anyone rating him as high as #1, #2, or #3 in the early 90's and he certainly wasn't getting the kinda hype that Ruddock was. And do you really think that if someone went out there and beat Shannon Briggs right now that it would mean didly squat?

 

I'm not sure Shannon Briggs should even be licensed to box.
I'd hate to see him beaten up or KO'd again.

 

Well, you seem to agree with me that Ruddock deserved his rating ...(which is all I'm saying - Ruddock wasn't overrated ... he deserved his rating).

On the other, you seem to be saying you think Tim Witherspoon deserved to be rated higher because he beat many of the same guys earlier? (Witherspoon was in the title picture back then, too. In fact, he was in line for a WBO title shot with Moorer in 1992 ... until he lost to Bigfoot Martin.)

Timing is important. Ruddock giving Tyson two tough fights back then was considered a badge of honor. Witherspoon stinking out the joint against Bigfoot Martin certainly hurt his career.

Then again, if Ruddock had beaten Witherspoon like he beat Dokes and Smith, I'm sure some would just say Spoon was well past it, too. Tim was pretty hot and cold during that time period.

And yes, I do think if someone knocked out Shannon Briggs right now, it would mean more than didly squat. And if that same guy knocked out Briggs and Stiverne and Haye, and let's say outpointed Browne, I think people would be pissing their pants over what a stud he was. (Until that guy lost ... and then people on here would say he was overrated - because they don't seem to know what the word means.)

Former champs have cachet. Beating them matters. It always has. And when Ruddock scored wins over those guys, it mattered.

 

I understand what you mean.

There was a good example few years ago - Robert Helenius beat 3 faded former champions in Brewster, Peter and Lyakhovich and was considered as one of the top-contenders but then he had an awful fight vs Chisora and got an injury, so he quickly lost his rankings.

 

Ruddock deserved to be rated. In the top 4 or 5 even.
But I think at one point people blatantly ignored his flaws and the possible weaknesses in his skillset and in his resume, and many of them gave him way too much credit for the Tyson fights.
I think Tyson was a bit overrated anyway, and certainly after the Douglas loss, so that explains a lot of it.

On the one hand people could see Tyson wasn't quite as sharp and methodical as he had been a few years earlier, but at the same time many wanted to make out as if Ruddock was a level up from Tyson's previous opposition.

Ruddock actually fought poor strategy against Tyson. Twice really.
And it wasn't as if Tyson needed to use all his skills to win those fights.