Definitely Holyfield. Holyfield was way past his best but he was still regarded as the best in the world (unless you had Lewis #1 already) and held the WBA and IBF titles, and was favourite going into the first fight. I don't think Lewis fought anyone else on that level.
My personal favorites are: - Ruddock, which showed Lewis' raw instincts and power. - Briggs - both the worst and best of Lewis in 4 and a half rounds. - Holyfield - Probably has to be considered the best win. - Rahman (2) - Punch perfect, with a sledgehammer ending. - Vitali K - Old Man gets assaulted in hostile takeover attempt and then trounces his would-be heir.
Maybe his first win over Holyfield (I know I know it was a “draw”). Ruddock was favored to beat him if I recall correctly that was a huge win in the context of when it happened/what it meant. A lot of folks had Golota and then Grant beating him. Tua too. It’s easy to dismiss wins after the fact but it’s also got to be properly assessed what it meant then. Vitali gathered steam and legs as a good win but it was a sloppy performance in a great fight. Vitali was seen as cannon fodder so only fair to remember that as it’s only fair to put the above wins into proper perspective.
Greatest win would be Holyfield. Best win could be argued between Holyfield, Vitali, Ruddock, Golota and Rahman II.
Best win was probably Evander. Ruddock was good. Golota. How he stopped him easily when Bowe struggled with him. Michael Grant He was hyped to be this good enough fighter and Lennox outclassed him easily. Landed the right hand within no time.
I also pick Holyfield. Tysons, Tuas and Morissons where made for Lewis. He was one of the best to keep small fighters and punchers on distance. But Holifield had the tools to be a serious threat for Lewis. Unlike other boxers Holifield was able to change his style or make adjustments due to his opponent. Dispite his age he was in pretty good physical shape at this time. Good stamina, still fast hands and legs. The 2002 Mike Tyson was just too slow and too heavy to cross the distance.
This right here. Coming back from an embarrassing ko and demolishing the guy that ko'd him was very impressive.
Holyfield are his best two wins but were snooze fests. Grant was a joke, a total HBO hype job, Frank Bruno was a better fighter and a better win. Ruddock was a decent but IMO was done after Tyson Golata ? LOL, it took a stoned shot to shid Tyson a minute or so longer to stop that Mental Midget. He exposed Euro arm puncher VK when old But I cannot overlook two one punch ko' losses against Palookas
Vitali wasn't much when Lennox faced him. He was a substitute for Kirk Johnson. Ruddock was a big deal. Holyfield was a big deal. Grant was a big deal (Lewis' Fred Fulton)... Rahman rematch was a big deal.
Disagree. You might not have thought much about him, but he was ranked #1. 32-1. He was fighting on the undercard as you know-which by that time had already won the WBO title in his 25th fight. We know he quit due to injury- tis on him, but by that time...he seemed to have had a pretty decent skill set. The same Byrd that convincingly beat Tua lost 8 of 9 rounds on one judge's scorecard, and 7 of 9 on the two others against Vitali. IT is a bit amusing to me in that Byrd was a late sub for Vitali -like he was for Lennox. But he whooped his top ranked foe...until.. Hey...rotator cuff torn..he didnt do like Holyfield & fight on, he quit. My point? If he was good enough to win a title, defend it, have all TKO/KO going in against Byrd-outboxes him as well & accumulated 7 years of pro experience. What more did he need to gain in his 7th year for you to say he was something of a challenge for Lennox? Jab? Footwork? What did he lack after 7 years pro + 3 title defenses? On another note- The Mercer fight was a definite gut-check fight. Some feel Mercer deserved the win. It was probably the last time Mercer gave a top level performance. Great win for