Who rates higher as a all time heavyweight Larry Holmes or Lennox Lewis?

Mixed takes on this one so why not.

 

Lewis for me.

There's arguments for both but what I like about Lewis is that he seemed to have an 'extra gear' where he could go beast mode and just flatten guys. Holmes was more consistent but his field of opponents seems softer to me.

 

I've had Larry at three for forever and a day but having Lennox there is fine. Having Marciano or Foreman or Frazier or Holyfield or Tyson or Johnson is fine. Having me there is not unreasonable. Hamed is another one.

 

Larry. 19 title defenses + his opposition is vastly underrated, especially considering how many of them were young with minimal mileage at the time of their match.

 

Pros for Holmes.

Beat more ranked opposition.

Had more title defences.

Never lost in his prime unlike Lewis.

Pros for Lewis.

Beat stronger opposition.

Unified the titles unlike Holmes.

Beat every man he ever faced.

All in all its what you prefer.

 

I have it as a coin toss for a third all time spot.

 

Lewis is more destructive and Holmes is more durable. Holmes could beat a lot of ATGs but he would never ever have an easy night. While Lewis could lose to alot of ATGs but he could also blow guys out of the water with his right hand and right uppercut.

I am going with Holmes. Lewis beat slightly better competition but not by much. Both guys had at least 1 close win that they should have rematched - Holmes vs Witherspoon and Lewis vs Mercer. Both guys defeated ATG's who were well past it although Holyfield in 1999 was better than Ali in 1980.

Still, i am going with Holmes. I think having a great chin counts more than having great power. I can't see Holmes getting flattened by McCall or Rahman even on his worst night. And ultimately with Lewis, while he was very destructive, his skills were rarely tested vs highly skilled durable opponents. When he did run into such guys, whether it was Mercer or an aging Holyfield, it was clear that his skills, while good, were not extraordinary. What was extraordinary was his physical strength and power.

Holmes for me.

 

Depends on what you value. If you value resume and dominance then Lewis was better. If you value consistency and title defenses then Holmes was better. Personally I value the former more so i have Lewis higher.

 

Very, very similar for me
Might give the edge to Lewis?

No, Holmes was still going strong well past his best in his 40s fighting the new Generation, plus as the best jab in the business. Lewis wins h2h, but I have Larry edging him in an all time list, but it is very close either way

 

Holmes. Only people ahead of him on my list are Ali and Louis.

 

I have you as a top 3 ESB troll anyday.

 

I have Holmes at 3
Lewis at 4
Not much in it

 

Hi Noel.
I have the reserve, but not with a lot of conviction, very difficult to separate these great HWs.
hope you are well my friend, chat soon buddy.
Mike.

 

Holmes beat lots of very talented heavies when the division was stacked. A proper champion who was out often. All comers. Off the deck to beat Shavers etc

it’s Holmes

 

Durable guys were always going to be an issue for Lewis.

"it was clear that his skills, while good, were not extraordinary. What was extraordinary was his physical strength and power." Exactly. Good skills combined with being big, strong, and hitting hard is a fantastic combo, until he lands in the ring with someone really durable and equivalent or better skills.