Lennox Lewis - Whats The Lowest He Can Be Ranked?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Russell, Oct 27, 2009.


  1. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Way to cherry pick the weaker fighters, Briggs was Linear Champion and future titlist, Morrison was an ex-belt holder coming off ko'ing Rudduck, Mavrovic was an unbeaten prospect.

    What sort of biased **** gobbler picks out only the worst wins when assessing a man who fought everyone in his era beating them all
     
  2. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,241
    25,578
    Jan 3, 2007
    It is a rather mind boggling thing.

    Here let me give it a try..

    Muhammad Ali

    - Chuck Wepner
    - Jean Pierre Coopman
    - Alfredo Evangelista
    - Leon Spinks
    - Richard Dunn
    - Rudi Lubbers
    - Brian London
    - Karl Mildenberger

    Yep works pretty good.
     
  3. turpinr

    turpinr Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,227
    1,253
    Feb 6, 2009
    bloody hell.its nearly the cream of europe.:lol:
     
  4. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    I dont consider the 90s to be what you say. The early 90's was a clear indication of where the talent pool was heading, and its been on a steady decline since.
    Beating top contenders doesnt mean they're good. Rahman, Golota, Morrison, Grant, Briggs, Mason, were not and fall perfectly into the style I mentioned in a previous post. Big strong men with little technical skills.
     
  5. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,579
    Nov 24, 2005
    Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. I thought I was quite clearly and openly picking the "lesser fighters" of the bunch to show that the lesser fighters in Lewis's prime runs are actually lower down on the pecking order than any of Tyson's weakest title fight opponents in his alleged "weak division".
    And in fact, in my posts, I claim that Lewis's best win - Holyfield - is better than any result on Tyson's resume.

    Briggs was coming off a gift win over George Foreman. Morrison and Ruddock were former contenders by 1995, and Morrison had been blasted out of any pretense of the top echelon by the forgettable Michael Bent.

    Hey, to be fair, Mavrovic was more than just an "unbeaten prospect", he was European champion I think. But that means nothing on the world scene if the opponents are the ones Mavrovic had faced.
     
  6. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    I think Lewis' win over Holyfield is quite comparable to Tysons win over Spinks and Holmes, specifically Holmes, who went on to fight quite competitively years after his demolition at the hands of Tyson.
     
  7. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Holyfield and Tyson didnt have good technical skills? Klitschko certainly has proven unorthodox skills.

    All those other men were bigger, stronger and harder hitters than any of era, no other champion has had to cope with those sort of murderer's row of KO artists before. Especially when you add Tua to that list

    Without doubt Lennox's competition only comes second to Ali's (unless you want to count Holyfield who lost most of his big 1s)
     
  8. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    Wow you really dont read my posts. Tyson was a corpse, Holyfield had one foot in the grave. Murderer punchers mean little if you cant land. Like I said, being a big puncher or being big and strong means little if you have no technique which is the biggest problems of his era. It didnt take a monster puncher to make him look bad did it? Just like Bowe, or Tyson?
     
  9. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,579
    Nov 24, 2005
    I think Holyfield was a better win going on sheer quality and current status of the opponent. But not much miles, and Tyson impressed me more in the way he dispatched Holmes and Spinks. Lewis was jobbed against Holyfield the first time, but it wasn't a scintillating master class by any stretch. The 2nd fight was close.
     
  10. PetethePrince

    PetethePrince Slick & Redheaded Full Member

    28,760
    84
    May 30, 2009
    I'm with Unforgiven on this one basically. I would highlight, though, that I definitely take the 2 biggest KO losses highly in this equation. We're talking the upper echolean of potentialyl the greatest Heavyweights ever. Lewis was defending a crowned possession, I don't see how you can compare Tyson KO loss to Danny Williams to Lewis ones at the top stage. Tyson was becoming irrelevant, fighting for the money, was way past, and wasn't on any big stage or at a career defining/hurting point. Tyson also blew his damn knee out in the fight, that makes the comparison even more hilarious.

    Earlier, someone examine what Tyson had done to opponents in comparison to Lewis. It's important to note, Tyson virtually ruined Ruddock in his 2 fights with him. He was never the same and I rate Tyson's wins more so than Lewis early KO because of this. Also, the Holyfield loss was of course to a better Holyfield. Bruno was also better when Mike fought him, obviously. I think the 90's was actually a pretty solid era, but it gets confusing. The top and elites are very talented, but beyond a certain number of that and contenders it gets a bit shallow I think. The 80's, although not exceptionally great, nor shining with big top names was perhaps a bit more steady I suppose. When Tyson did lose in his prime, it was to a man on a mission who fought perhaps one of the best fights in HW championship history. Lewis got starked twice by a 1 punch KO type fashion. In hindsight, I have to reevaluate Lewis' position, and we all will have to depending upon how great or great Vitali starts to rate/become. Due to the controversy, it remains as Lewis most under-appreciated victories.
     
  11. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,213
    8,753
    Jul 17, 2009
    Lennox was active though. As far as the level of opposition goes,he could only fight who was around. Both Riddick Bowe and Mike Tyson preferred to discard the WBC belt rather than defend it against him.
     
  12. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Well what you have to remember is 2 of those fights, were comeback fights after a KO loss. Lewis's run as a contender went from 1991-2003, so including 2 comeback fights over 11years is very harsh. Why not look at how many top 10 ranked contenders he fought in that time? How many ex/current/future champions/titlists he fought in that time?

    Morrison was still seen as a top contender after the Rudduck win and he was 45-2-1. In 1996 Tyson ducked Lewis, discarding the WBC and paying £6million not to face him, which slowed Lennoxs progress.

    I'm a fan of Tyson and Lewis, and I think they both have top6 resumes
     
  13. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    I read your agenda ridden posts and smell them as the BS they clearly are

    Holyfield was only 3years older than Lennox, Lennox was past his physical prime too, slower, Holyfield was also bigger/stronger than when he was younger and may not have taken Lennox's punches as a smaller weaker man. Lennox was older than Tyson. Holyfield ducked Lennox earlier in his 'prime', when was Holyfield's prime, when he was nearly getting ko'd by Bert Cooper or getting outboxed by Moorer? Tyson ducked Lennox to fight Holyfield in 1996.

    Guess what those murderous punchers that couldnt KO Lennox Ko'd allot of other contenders just not. The Golota who wasn't skilled enough to land on Lennox chased Bowe into retirement to give 1 example :yep Rudduck was skilled enough to fight a close decision with Tyson (oh right I forgot Tyson ruined him, except there's no indication of that and he looked the same Rudduck in his next fight)
     
  14. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    Holyfield was on a run that consisted of Tyson (twice) and Moorer. Holmes hadn't fought in 2 years and Spinks who was weak at the weight with 2 questionable decisions over Holmes 2 years before and fighting no top rated fighters since

    Lets do a poll - 1999 Holyfield versus 1988/7 Spinks/Holmes, we know full well Holyfield would clearly decision Holmes and KO Spinks
     
  15. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,579
    Nov 24, 2005
    He fought his fair share of contenders, but I'm not always impressed with the quality of some fighters who make the rankings. At some point, you have to make a judgment and discriminate that some are better than others.
    Also, Lewis didn't always impress me in the manner of the wins. I balance that out with the way he eased past such GOOD contenders as Ruddock and Tua, and the fact he beat the opponent that really mattered - Holyfield.
    Overall, yes, Lewis is deserving of mention as one of the significant historical heavyweights - and I put him at number 4 of the last 30 years - but I dont follow the general line that seems common here on this forum. His record speaks for itself, but I'm not head-over-heels about his opposition and his performances.


    Morrison was always being built up. The Ruddock win was one of his biggest, but like his other "big" wins, a win over an aging or faded ex-contender.
    He was picked by most to KO Mercer, and Bent was supposed to be an easy assignment and he got KO'd.
    I'm not saying he was a bad fighter but his resume was thin, and mostly based on "safe" fights, tomato cans and has-beens. He struggled with Joe Hipp and a faded Carl Williams (apparently a sucker for a left hook) and Ross Purrity in his prime too.