Lennox Lewis is great but

I remember Bowe throwing the belt in the trash. The guy Lewis stopped in the Olympics. It’s not so much he was avoided and more he wasn’t worth the risk. Those at the top didn’t want the smoke.

 

They "didn't want the smoke" so much that they offered him multimillion dollars purses.
Lennox was the only boxer in the 90's who was either awarded a belt (in 1993) or had to face the following best ranked contender to gain it (in 1997).
Neither Holyfield, Tyson, Foreman or Bowe were in those situations.

Edit : the only major boxer *

 

I disagree regarding Norton. He lost to all time great who was at or near his peak. Ken gave a good account of himself running it to the wire. One of the greatest 15th rounds in history. He was probably a shade past it himself.

 

Lennox also is the only one who threw a championship belt in the garbage to avoid fighting his #1 rival.

Oh no...that wasn't Lewis that Bowe. My mistake.

 

Wasn't that not far off from how Lewis was viewed at that time? I believe he only earned full respect in the boxing world by the late 90s.

 

That's a completely different subject. Norton put up a great effort in this fight, which is personally my favorite HW fight of all time.

 

That makes no sense.

It doesn't matter what people "wanted to see". Yes boxing is a business, but you can't just ignore rankings for ratings. It's why the LeBron vs Kobe finals never happened, they couldn't rig things to force them to meet even though it would have made stupid money.

If the champion blatantly ducks after being told to defend his belt, he needs to be stripped end of discussion.

Plenty of people lost their belt in their first defense, this is also irrelevant AF. And it's not like he lost to a scrub, Norton defended his belt against a prime Larry Holmes lol. What are we talking about here.

 

Plenty of people lost their belt in their fist defence, but Norton remains the only "champion" who never won a title fight. I don't know what we are talking about now, I already stated that both Norton and Lewis were paper champions and to be the man you have to beat the man.

 

This is quite the weak argument, and it doesn't gain any strength through repetition.

The value of a prospective contract isn't determined by what someone has earned on any one job previously. An offer simply being of a higher value than what has been earned before doesn't make it a fair deal or good business.

 

Yes it could be good business if the boxer in question isn't very marketable.
Money is one, if not the most important factor before making a fight.
For example, what was wrong with the 10 million dollars from Tyson's camp before the Mercer fight AND the step-aside deal ?

Fact is Lewis was the specialist for claiming that he was avoided by the champions even though he had no problem himself delaying his mandatory WBA defence (and thus not respecting the contract he had signed) or simply relinquishing his IBF title (invoking a myriad of excuses).

 

Norton was awarded the title because he was ducked horrifically ... if governing bodies have any value whatsoever then they have. right to protect fighters who are being maneuvered out of their rightful title shots. Norton was supposed to get the winner of Ali Spinks 1.Ali knew that Norton would crush Spinks and that he;d never beat Norton again and begged and creamed for an immediate rematch ... with the money at stake al went with it and Norton was robbed. That's why he was awarded the title and it was after beating a prime Jimmy Young who had recently beat Lyle, Foreman and was ribbed against Ali.

Don't get me started on Lewis ... the man was ducked , the man won the title and defeated the most challenging;anging opposition of is generation.

 

Lewis I have around number 6-7 all time but as said capable of beating almost anyone.

Do his couple of Ko defeats hurt him a bit? I think yes they do.

I think it detracts a bit from a great heavyweight to be splattered by middling opposition when they’re on the right side of their prime. Way past it is another matter. Getting knocked down is another matter.

As said I think he can beat anyone, but those defeats showed he could have come unstuck just as easily well.

 

Whether a fighter is 'marketable' or not, the value of a contract depends on what the fight is worth in revenue, risk, and leverage at the time. Being offered $XX million by a given camp doesn't automatically make it fair - especially if the terms or timing were stacked for the other side.

Lewis proved that himself when he earned three times more fighting Tony Tucker than what Rock Newman had tried to lowball him with for Bowe. A purse isn't judged in isolation; it's judged against the true value of the fight and the conditions attached to it.

It wasn't a clean $10M fight offer - that's what was wrong with it. It was a step-aside package designed to let Tyson face Seldon first, with a vague promise of Lewis fighting the winner later. Lewis took the money, but Tyson broke that promise by refusing to face him after Seldon, which is why the WBC stripped Tyson of the belt soon after.

Yours is an overstatement. If you're referring to Ruiz, that's a weak comparison to Tyson/Lewis. When Lewis made the fight with Grant, Ruiz wasn't even the WBA's leading contender - Akinwande was, and he was medically unfit - and, in any event, the WBA had willingly sanctioned the delay.

As for the IBF title, there wasn't a "myriad of excuses" at all. The issue was simple in that Chris Byrd was a commercial albatross - unwatchable and virtually guaranteed to lose money. Moreover, he didn't fit into the plans to build toward a Lewis/Tyson rematch, so Lewis walked away from a fight nobody wanted to see ( not even Byrd's promoter - King - who preferred to pay not to see it. )

But Lewis making maneuvers of his own to get the fights he wanted distracts from the original point and leaves you trying to blame him for everything. You castigate him for not fighting Ruiz and Byrd while also blaming him for not getting the Bowe and Tyson fights. Do you not see how that comes across as somewhat one-sided?

 

HOW DO YOU BEAT "THE MAN" WHEN THE MAN DUCKS YOU?

That's what we're discussing.

Denigrating someone and calling them a "paper champion" when the champion himself ran away is silly.

 

Yes, you are referring to the time when Don King (whom Lewis had strangely no problem dealing with during that occasion) overbided in a desperate attempt to regain control of the heavyweight crown.
Barring the Bruno fight, Lewis subsequent purses during that time weren't high.

And Lewis was offered a two-fight package deal worth 12 million, which Maloney himself considered "a good offer".

The 10 million offer was for the 13th July of 1996, the original Seldon date.
Lewis' team asked for 15 million and the fight to be diffused on HBO.
Tyson was boxing's highest draw at the time, why would he have accepted the demands of the challenger ? If Lewis was so eager to fight him, he would not have accepted the step-aside money (which after the 10 million offer).

Lewis was contractually obligated to defend against the first or the next leading available WBA contender. Lewis knew that perfectly when he started to negotiate with Grant, this is why sued King first so he could get out the contract.

The fact is that Lewis did what he reproached others to do (which was my point). Whatever the arguments you use, Byrd was a deserving challenger who had beaten Vitali and Tua.
Your interpretation about King paying for the fight not happening is misleading , since Lewis showed no intention to fight Byrd (the fight was anticipated for December of 2002) and was sitting on the deadline, King payed Lewis so he could relinquish the title and save the anticipated date for a fight between Byrd and Holyfield.

Classic reverse accusation.
It's generally the Lewis' fans who are willing to justify with every kind of arguments (and I can understand some of them) Lewis not fighting his mandatories, whereas they don't afford the same leniency when the situation is reversed.
Lewis seeking the big money fight with Grant instead of following what he contractually agreed on to fight : good.
Tyson fighting Seldon for unifying the title (the same title Bowe, Lewis and Holyfield couldn't keep more than three times) after offering Lewis a career high purse : bad.

Lewis relinquishing the IBF title because he felt he had better options : very good business decision.

Bowe wanting to defend against other opponents than Lewis before making a megafight with him : horrible ducker.

I'm not one-sided. I apply the same scrutiny/standards Lewis' fans apply to the others.

By the way, I already said before that Bowe is also to blame for the fight not happening.