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

What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Is there proof he DID take them? I find this stance a bit ludicrous.

What about the talk Ali took them? Should we take his ranking back?

 

I agree,

And here is another thing I'd like to throw out there ( though most are not likely to agree ), given that there have been so many athletes in so many sports over the years who have employed the use of performance enhancers, should we even really make a big deal about it? I mean, truthfully I really don't care anymore.

 

Think you misunderstood me. I never accused Lewis of taking steroids, but some of his opponents clearly did.

I'm starting to find this "innocent until prove guilty" a bit tiresome. This site is all about hypthesis an deductions, not exact science.

For example, I think black fighters had a harder time come through than white until at least the 1950's. I can't prove this, but just looking at how hard it was for excellent fighters like Wills and Burley to get ahead is quite a clear indicator.

The same reasoning goes for steroids in the 80's and 90's. We all know that they were rife in sports at that time, and that testing (which still seems to be kind of lax in boxing) was quite far from catching up. When you look at how very, very much bigger and muscular HWs became during these years it seems quite possible, to say the least, that steroids were used in boxing as well.

From there it seems like a reasonable thought that the ones that most look like they have been taking steroids might well have done just that. And wasn't Morrisson caught as well?

So if you don't think Lewis was taking any (which I don't claim he was), it should only elevate his standing. Because, believing that none of his opponents were is nothing less than a leap of faith IMO.

 

Probably not. But if there's good reason to believe that one athlete didn't take them while his competitors were, it should elevate this athlete's standing.

 

It's baffling to me how Foreman can be rated ahead of Lewis overall. I even think that he's overrated on a head to head basis too.

 

Holmes Jab,

Why would you say that its baffling? Sure, a good argument can be made that Lewis was the better man, but a similar case can be made in reverse. And being overrated head to head? Why? This was a man who was only stopped once in 81 pro fights, and by the greatest boxer of all time - in a match that had more to do with exhaustion than chin issues. He convincingly KO'd two undefeated lineal champions who were either at or near their primes. He has the highest win/ko ratio of any heavyweight champ in history. He acheived the impossible by coming back after a 10 year abscence in his 40's to regain the title and be its oldest captor.

Now, despite all of these things, do I think a good case can be made for Lewis being better both head to head as well as legacy wise? My answer is yes. But my point, is that its not unreasonable to say that Foreman has a strong voice in the issue as well.

 

My top 5 right now is:

Ali
Louis
Lewis
Holmes
Marciano

On a H2H basis I'd rate the above as:

Ali
Lewis
Holmes
Louis
Marciano

TBH though, the only 2 sure placings for me in both lists is #1 and #2. The rest can be changed around on a whim. So yeah, I guess I do rank Lewis in the top 3 on some days.

So come give me a slap.

 

A heavyweight with a dodgy chin who was only floored twice in a 14 year professional career. I think you need to consult the dictionary and look up the word 'dodgy', 'cos you clearly don't understand it.

Why do you have Tyson so high on your ATG list? What's he done to deserve being ranked at #4?

 

I agree with everything you say, and not to be a nitpicking ass, but Holmes actually had 19 defences - not 21. He is commonly listed as having 20, but the Marvis Frazier match was a non-title bout given that the WBC had already stripped Holmes and the IBF had not yet awarded him their title.