Anyone here rank Lennox Lewis top 3 all time at HWT ?

Ali is #2 for me, inferior h2h and his resume is not that much better than Lewis' if at all.

 

... and Dempsey who hardly defended the title much at all during a three or four year period should? Listons career outside of the Clay defeats has more substance than Dempseys ever did. He'd annihilate him if they ever met too. :yep

 

I think there's an argument to be made to rank Lewis behind Ali and Louis.

Holmes for example wasn't as dominant against world class opposition. as Lewis. Lewis breezed through top ranked guys like Ruddock, Morrison, Golota and Tyson (who still was a contender, even though he was past it), while Holmes had his hands full with Norton, Witherspoon, Shavers, Williams etc. Holmes late career helps him, though.

Then you have Johnson and Marciano. I think they both have good cases to be ranked ahead of Lewis, but I can see a case being made for Lewis as well.

All in all I feel it's very close when it comes to Lewis, Holmes, Marciano and Johnson.

 

If oyu think Lewis would be Ali h2h it's one thing, but his resume was clearly better.

1. He arguably has better top wins in Liston, Foreman and Frazier.

2. He beat 30+ ranked opponents, while Lewis didn't even beat 20.

3. He's got no losses as embarassing as Lewis's to Rahman and McCall. The loss to Holmes was very one-sided, but he ended on his feet even though he wasn't even a shell of his former self. Lewis was more or less in his prime for both his losses.

This is a substantial difference I would say. Add in that Ali lost his best years to a long lay-off and it becomes miles wide.

 

Liston wins were under controversial circumstances. Foreman only had one significant win at that point - over Frazier, and nothing else. His loss to Young downgrades Ali's win also. Frazier - Ali lost to him in the 1st fight, when Frazier was at his peak, subsequent wins were over worse version of Frazier, after his loss to Foreman.

Number of mediocre or plain bad contenders Ali beat is of no importance to me.

It's not like Ali didn't have his own embarassing moments. Controversial decision over Doug Jones, almost getting knocked out by Henry Cooper (who was much worse than either McCall or Rahman), loss and two very controversial decisions over mediocre Ken Norton, being behind on the scorecards against primitive Ron Lyle, very controversial wins over Young and Shavers, and a loss to a novice Leon Spinks.

 

Liston is definite top 6 in my book.

 

Bollocks. When you watch the fights (especially the first) there's no doubt about who's the better man.

Many still have Foreman in their top 10 or even top 5. At the time he was considered an unbeatable monster.

True. But still better than Lewis's wins over an old and depleted Holyfield IMO.

It is to me, and many others. And seeing how two such opponents got through to Lewis, one must wonder how his record would look if he had faced the double amount of ranked opponents. Like Ali did.

Those are not shining moments, but not really embarassing (well, the loss to Spinks is kind of embarrasing). Against both Norton and Jones, Ali managed to rally in the last round to steal the decision. That shows heart and winning instinct, which is crucial for a great champion.

"Primitive" Lyle was a better boxer than most of Lewis's opponents, and even though Ali looked lazy and lackluster he was never hit by anything substantial, and finished off Lyle quite impressively.

Against Shavers he took half a dozen rights that all were probably harder than anything Rahman or McCall landed on Lewis, but he didn't go down, much less get KO'd. His losses to Norton (where he lasted the distance with a broken jaw) and Frazier were competitive, though clear. That's a long shot from being KO'd.

And let's not forget Lewis's lackluster perfomances. Mercer, Holyfield (rematch) and Vitaly immediatly springs to mind.

 

If you consider the 60's and 70's overall being at least on par with the 80's and 90's in HW talent you can magine this scenario:

Lewis turns pro at 18, in 1983. Between 1983-1990 he beats everyone who's anything: Witherspoon, Thomas, Tubbs, Berbick, Tucker, Smith, Holmes, Tyson etc. Dokes is the only he doesn't face (just like Ali didn't face Machen).

After a 3,5 half lay-off he comes back. Looses a title fight to Bowe/Holyfield and a non-title fight (to Moorer?), but regains the title in 1997. He also avenges his losses and beats all the 90's top guys, many of them quite easily.

By 1999 he begins to slip badly, and wins several controversial decisions before loosing and regaining his title to a fringe contender. He retires, but tries a comeback against Wladimir in 2003 and loose big. The following year he gets beat by an up and coming contender, and then retires a final time.

Would this career be better or worse than his actual one?

 

Rubbish.

 

I have him in the top3. I made a long post about it a year ago or so.

I could give a long list of reasons, but i see that you rank Holmes #3. How is having Lewis there slapworthy but Holmes not? Holmes' opposition was poor, he made it no secret that he avoided some of the best around, never bothered to unify and never took any risk until he was in his 40's.

Now, the above sounds very negative and i think Holmes at 3 is defendable, but my point is that you can make any such criticism for a top3 candidate (Lewis got knocked out twice, Dempsey sat on the title for 3 years, holds the record for longest ducking period of one the best challengers in history, was knocked out by a 37 year old lightheavyweight, Marciano fought old men, Foreman never beat a decent boxer or someone who wasn't tailor made for him, Frazier had a short career and couldn't adapt either, etc etc).

 

Are you kidding? What does mean "almost getting knocked out by Henry Cooper"? Well, in this case I can say: Lewis was ALMOST outboxed by Frank Bruno, he was ALMOST knocked down by Briggs & Klitschko and almost lost to Ray Mercer, but he still won, didn't he? Word "ALMOST" means NOTHING in boxing!!!
Then again, Ali beat prime 25-years old Foreman, beat Frazier (who was slightly past his prime) twice and Liston twice. Lewis beat Holyfield, who was past his prime, but still good and Tyson, who was totally shot. Being in his prime, Ali never lost to McCall/Rahman-caliber opponents. Past prime Ali lost to Spinks and totally shot Ali lost to Berbick, but unlike Lewis in McCall/Rahman fights, he lost be decisions & wasn't KO'ed by one punch.

I have Lewis at #3 H2H and #7 in my ATG HW list

 

#9. I think Larry Holmes is overrated on these forums.

 

I think #3 is a tad too generous. My top three basically consist of Ali, Louis, and Marciano. From about #4 onward it gets complicated, and I often find myself changing people around depending on how I'm feeling on a given day.

 

Why on Earth do you think Larry Holmes was so much better than Lennox Lewis?? :?

 

If it could be proven that Lewis never took steroids it would help his case even more, I think. At least three of his opponents (Holyfield, Morrisson and Briggs) look like good bets for having used steroids.