"Lennox Lewis wouldn't be THAT good if he fought in the 60s or 70s"- James Toney

Lewis didn't face a Tyson anywhere near his prime, why on earth would anyone bring that up as a plus for Lewis.

Also, styles make fights, someone like Corrie Sanders may well have been a far more dangerous matchup for Lewis than Bowe or Holyfield despite not being generally regarded as highly.

 

It's also worth noting that Holyfield and Tyson fought on far past their primes and accumulated many losses that could have been avoided had they retired close to their peaks.

Let's suppose that Holyfield retires in 1997 and Tyson retires in 2000. You don't think this would impact people's views of the era?

 

Who brought up the Lewis/Tyson fight?

 

1. Lewis wasn't avoided by Holyfield. Lewis wasn't avoided by Moorer (not that he wouldn't beat him - he just wasn't avoided).

2. Lewis defeated washed up version of Holyfield in the last year of the decade.

3. Lewis hadn't fought Tyson and Bowe in 90s. Not his fault, but you can't count his amateur 1988 win over Bowe or 2002 win over beyond shot Tyson in his resume for that decade (1990-1999).

3. If we look at The Ring Magazine annual rankings, we will find that Lewis wasn't ranked in 1990, but was ranked in top-10 for each of the following years. 1991 - #9, 1992 - #2, 1993 - #3, 1994 - #5, 1995 - #2, 1996 - #2, 1997 - #2, 1998- #2, 1999- #1. That equals 29 points in total. 29 points/9 years = 3.2

Only one heavyweight had better ranking in that decade, and his name is Evander Holyfield. He was also ouside of top-10 rankings for 1 years, but for different reason - because he announced his retioement after Michael Moorer first fight. In the other years of that decade Holyfield was ranked: 1990 - #1, 1991 - #1, 1992 - #2, 1993 - #1, 1995 - #5, 1996 - #1, 1997 - #1, 1998 - #1, 1999 - #2. It makes 15 points in total, therefore 15 points/9 years = 1.7. Much higher average ranking than Lewis' 3.2.

How many times Holyfield was ranked as #1 in that decade's annual rankings? 6. Lewis? 1.

How many times Holyfield was ranked in top-3 of the HW division in that decade? 8. Lewis? 7

So, Holyfield looks like more dominant fighter of the 90s in the HW division, but as @Unforgiven rightfully admitted, that decade wasn't dominated by anyone.

As for Lewis, he was dominant fighter in 2000-2003 (save for 7 months of 2001 when he was KO'ed by Rahman). It was his period of real domination, not 90s.

 

Yes he was - for years. Holyfield was even going to face Akinwande, in favor of meeting Lewis in 1999. Only fate saved that fight from coming off.

Holyfield wasn't washed up in '99.

Why do you think both Bowe and Tyson avoided Lewis? Moreover, what did either of them do over the course of the '90s that puts them on a par with Lewis for the decade?

LOL - It's easy to remain at number 1 and look dominant when the next in line (Lewis) was consistently overlooked and didn't get a look-in for years. Another case of looking good on paper until the context is brought to light.

He certainly punctuated his authority over the division, when he ended his career, beating the next would-be dominant champ in VK.

 

Wrong once again, buddy.

Holy was scheduled to face Henry Akinwande in Summer 98 cause Henry was ranked #1 contender by WBA (later replaced by Ruiz). He didn't want to face Henry, he had to. And it was 1998, not 1999 where his fight vs Lewis was set. That was the reason why Holy had 10-month layoff after Moorer win

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-akinwande-fails-hepatitis-test-1163123.html

 

Yes, he WAS. He looked really bad against Vaughn Beane, losing 4 rounds to him and being unable to finish him off after knocking him down really hard. Holyfield was absolutely unable to KO Beane because he completely emptied his gas tank. Prime Holyfield or even slightly past it (from the first Tyson fight) would definitely finish Bean after that knockdown. And right after Lewis Holyfield went 1-1-1 against John Ruiz, which tells a lot about how close to his prime he was then.

It has happened well in the next decade (2003), 90s were over long ago, and we are talking about somebody dominating the division in 90s.

 

Nah - I'm right again, Buddy!

http://articles.latimes.com/1998/sep/20/sports/sp-24804


Though Holyfield was scheduled to fight Akinwande in June '98, until the fight was postponed, he was still looking to fight Akinwande, after he'd fought Bean. That bout would have been scheduled for early '99 and would have delayed the Lewis fight even longer.

Whether or not Holyfield had to fight Akinwande is up for debate since the contract, which was eventually signed for Lewis/Holyfield, included a clause for meeting the WBA's Leading contender, anyway. In any event, the initial wait for Akinwande and what could have been an even greater delay, before Holyfield got round to facing Lewis, is not really arguable.

 

It's a matter of opinion and I don't value yours that highly, to be honest.

You were the one that brought up the 2000's - I didn't.

 

but when he does..it plenty of smack.

James thinks he could beat SuperMan, Spiderman, Recon Marines, Navy Seals, British Royal Marines, Korean Rock Marines...

When he was asked if he had respect for Sam Peters beating him he replied, he'll have to kill me to get my respect. Nuff said right there.

 

I don't think that's the case mate imo… Frazier doesn't beat any super heavy of late, its to much to ask. Foreman dwarfed and man handled Joe, and their bigger, much bigger than Big George was. There isn't a 200lb ever imo that beats Lewis or healthy Vitali or Wlad..200lb is a stone lighter than prime Tyson and he's a midget compared to these guys now. I don't agree with a new division for the super heavies

 

I don't value yours at all. Because you are living in a fantasy world where Lennox Lewis can walk on water and change rock into bread.

 

Key word in that article is "expected". It's not like Holyfield or some member of his team said he will or want to face Akinwande. That conclusion was made by a journalist, because Akinwande was his mandatory challenger.

And reality is THIS (December 1, 1998): https://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/01/sports/boxing-holyfield-lewis-bout-coming-to-the-garden.html

 

Cornish is wank, Frazier puts a beatdown on both. I'm also picking the best of the little men imo with Frazier too. Holy does better than Joe against the big guys down to his boxing, but a 204lb Bowe 1 Holy and a fight of the century Frazier are massively outweighed combined with excellent skills with modern day big guys. I agree with Frazier or other great fighters of 200lb roughly, beat the average big guy, but if they are a Klit Lewis Bowe Fury Joshua then no