Lennox Lewis championship run

No, Lewis went to court because he argued that he signed a fraudulent contract.
This way, he wanted to have the possibility to fight the most bankable challenger (Grant) while retaining the WBA title.
However the contract stated that the winner of Lewis/Holyfield had to defend first against the WBA mandatory or the next leading WBA available contender.
By fighting Grant, Lewis was breaching the contract.
This is why Don King counter-sued and was able to obtain a favourable decision.

 

If the latter were true the former would be impossible. Also, I have no reason to care about any of that. He has no defenses as champion therefor is time as champion is ass.

 

You're acting like a boxing bureaucrat, obsessing over paperwork while ignoring the fights themselves. Lewis fought the best available challengers, losing a belt outside the ring because of politics doesn't erase what he did inside of it.

 

I have no reason to accept excuses or acknowledge promotional ratings boards.

 

So you’re openly admitting you don’t care about context or facts, just an arbitrary checkbox? That’s not analysis, that’s blind stubbornness.

 

I think it would have been nice to see him square off against Bowe, Moorer, Foreman, Wladimir, Byrd, Ruiz and younger renditions of Tyson and Holyfield. But in fairness it wasn’t his fault that some of these meetings never happened. Overall he’s an all time great in my book.

 

Nope.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/sports/boxing/030700box-lewis.html

Lewis's first defense of his undisputed championship was supposed to be against Akinwande, the W.B.A. mandatory challenger, but when Akinwande was not available Lewis moved on to Grant.

"In November we approached the W.B.A. to resolve this matter," English said. "In December we wrote them a letter with a proposal for a box-off to get this matter resolved. We got nowhere."

English said that after going to court in Philadelphia and determining that Akinwande was not healthy enough to challenge for the title, the W.B.A. offered no solution to the matter. So, Main Events and Lewis made a fight with Grant, who is No. 2 in the I.B.F. and the W.B.C. rankings and No. 5 in the W.B.A.

Also, WBA Sanctions Lewis-Ruiz in London
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/683342.stm

Next month's title clash between undisputed heavyweight champion Lennox Lewis and unbeaten American Michael Grant has been sanctioned by the WBA.

Top-ranked WBA contender Johnny Ruiz, with the backing of promoter Don King, had asked that Lewis be stripped of the crown for not facing him.

Instead, the WBA executive committee approved the 29th April fight at New York's Madison Square Garden, on the condition the winner agree to fight the WBA's top contender within 180 days.

It is most unlikely Grant would deny himself a shot at the WBA crown, even though such a move would allow his idol, Evander Holyfield, to fight Ruiz for the WBA title in a fight King had planned for 3 June.

Instead, Lewis has made plans to face Ruiz, an American, in London in July to comply with the WBA directive, according to Lewis' promoter, Panos Eliades.

 

Sure it was impressive. How were the Ruddock and Bruno fights not impressive? Razor Ruddock was the #1 contender when he was obliterated, and Bruno was highly ranked the whole first half of the 90s, and the Bruno-Lewis fight was a great title fight and a huge fight in England.

Bruno was even WBC champ the year Lewis reclaimed the WBC belt. Ruddock and Bruno were factors for most of the 90s. Tommy Morrison was, as well.

Leaving them off makes no sense, especially if you're going to call out Witherspoon as someone he "missed."

Tim Witherspoon certainly wasn't a factor in the 90s.

Hell, Wlad wasn't even a ranked contender in the 90s. He didn't even turn pro until after the 1996 Olympics.

 

I was not a Lewis fan when he was fighting, but retrospectively? What a fighter. Beat every man he ever faced, his losses didn't ruin him, he learnt, and he is one of the rare ones for whom the crown was not one of thorns. I think peak Tyson would likely have beaten him, and I think peak Holyfield would have beaten him. But he didn't know which one was turning up, and he fought them...and beat them. His destruction of Ruddock, Morrison, yes, really, Briggs, yup, gutcheck, coming through against the implacable, impervious Mercer, Bruno and his swansong against Vitali, out of shape, uninterested and still pulled it out. One of the greats for me.

 

Right.

I mean, if you had to make a list of the best guys Mike Tyson beat, Frank Bruno, Tony Tucker and Razor Ruddock would all be on the list.

Lewis beat all of them in his "first run" as WBC champ, and knocked out Tommy Morrison before regaining the title. And they aren't even brought up in the first post, because Lewis beat so many name fighters.

One of the greats.

 

https://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2000/0413/148940-boxing1/

" The WBA had sanctioned Lewis-Grant. But King said that was a violation of its own rules for mandatory defences. Grant (31-0) is the WBA's number 5 contender. Ironically, it was Lewis (35-1-1) who had initiated the court case in a bid to have his deal with King overturned. Lewis claimed that King had coerced him into signing a fraudulent contract to fight then number-one contender Henry Akinwande or the leading "available contender" even though King knew that Akinwande was suffering from Hepatitis B and not likely to fight any time soon.

Lewis's lawyers later went to court seeking dismissal of their suit. But the cagey King fought that move and once again became a player in lucrative heavyweight title fights. Last month Lewis withstood a bid by IBF number-one contender David Tua for an injunction to halt the Lewis-Grant bout on the grounds that Tua should be Lewis's mandatory next opponent instead of Grant. "

 

Hey man, our opinions were asked for, and that's my opinion. I think Morrison and Bruno are very underrated, and at that time, Briggs was a dangerous banger. Ruddock was definitely a danger man. Lewis didn't swerve these guys and all would be considered amongst the hardest hitters of their respective times. Fair play. He didn't just take easy, safe options every time. For what little it's worth I still think Bowe would have beaten him in the pro game, but that's an unpopular opinion and one we will never know the answer to.

I freely admit I'm bias, I used to love watching Morrison, Bruno and Razor. Everything was always all right till it wasn't, and that could go either way. Yet they still took the fights. Lot of fighters these days could learn from those guys...

 

From my recollection, King didn't countersue. Lewis filed with the judge to block the WBA ruling to fight their mando first ... everyone presented their sides, and then the judge took a long time to make a decision.

While he was considering it, Lewis came to an agreement with Ruiz to fight in London and came to an agreement to fight Tua at the end of the year to meet his mandatories, and everyone was good.

It was sort of a done deal.

Then, days before the Grant fight, the judge came down with the ruling in a case Lewis FILED and ruled against him. Then King, Ruiz, Holyfield, etc., pounced because Evander was going to sue King, Ruiz, and the WBA.

Lennox's own case bit him in the butt.

Regardless, Lewis agreed to fight Ruiz. And Ruiz was on board. Lewis didn't avoid him.

 

Not at all, I just disagree with you.

You like unofficial, promotional, ratings and use those to rationalize your position. My having no appreciation for ratings backed by creative writing credentials lacks no more context. ... Hell that's a weird direction to go even.

Only one of us is a collectivist. I could hardly be considered "consensus" here.

And for one who claims "facts" bro if there was a way for me to roll my eyes at you and stare I would. TF? TF? Facts? The **** bro?

FACT Ring Magazine are not the official ratings board for boxing. ****ing facts? No, no you do not deal in facts. You deal STRICTLY in opinions and how popular those opinions are. ****ing fact ... Jiminy I'll be chuckling that one off for a while! Facts he says while thumping that Ring at me. Christ all mighty.

 

You’re acting like ‘official’ titles exist in a vacuum, as if belts magically define greatness instead of who a fighter actually beats. Lewis lost a belt due to politics while fighting the best opponent available. But sure, keep pretending that ignoring context makes you objective rather than just stubborn. After all sanctioning bodies (the same ones that strip champions for not paying fees and hand out ‘super,’ ‘regular,’ and ‘interim’ belts like candy) are the true arbiters of boxing greatness. Meanwhile, the actual fights? Irrelevant, apparently. Solid logic.