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

Well this is the bottomline. Both Lewis or Holmes at #3 is defendable, as is having Marciano. It all comes down to what criteria you use, but there is no clear distinction as there is between Louis, Ali and the rest. So that's why i don't really see how it's "slapworthy".

 

The myth of unbeatable monster Foreman is just that - a myth. It was discussed here before, the betting odds weren't that big in his favor. You can look up what was being said about Foreman prior to his 1st fight with Frazier, I think the Ring gave opinions of about a hundred of experts, or something. A win over mediocre Norton was nothing special either.

Holyfield won a title after the Lewis fights, Frazier had done next to nothing after the 1st Foreman loss. That Frazier clearly had less left than Holyfield, despite being almost 10 years younger than Holyfield at that point. It's not even comparable how much more significant are Holyfield's achievements during his career, than those of Frazier.

Ali's contenders on average are inferior to those Lewis faced. It was plain laughable when he went on a tour against European "pretenders", it was another 'bum of the month' club.

Rally in the last round or whatever, he shouldn't have had problems with those opponents in the first place.
Watching Lyle fights it is clear to see that he's pretty wild and easy to hit. He wasn't much better skillwise than Foreman, and that's speaking a lot, coz Foreman wasn't skilled at all.
Shavers basically landed clean and flush on Ali once during the fight, and Ali was out on his feet, only holding to the ropes saving him. I don't think he was in a better state than Lewis when he got up vs McCall (premature stoppage), at that moment.
Norton was a nobody (Ali himself claimed that), when he beat Ali. It is one thing getting caught by accidental punch (thrown with closed eyes), than it is getting outboxed by mediocre boxer.

 

There is more nonesense in this post than I even care to pick apart.

 

Absolutely agree! :good
It is one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever read

 

Probably because you simply cannot pick it apart. For a start you could post some quotes from contemporary sources (Ring magazine, for example) about the things I pointed out in my post. But I'm guessing you don't have those and never read anything about it except written many years after the events.

 

Using the testimonies of contemporary resources and their criticisms about an unknown fighter BEFORE he ever hit his mark in an effort to bolster the claim that concencus hall of fame fighters were mediocre journeyman, is not a valid argument, or one that warrants wasting one's time to refute. If this were indeed the case, then Cassius Clay/muhammad Ali would still be a punk with a loud mouth and no fighting ability, as many thought BEFORE he fought Sonny Liston.

 

H2H Lewis #2
Resume Lewis #5

Generally speaking...... #3/4 seems about right

People who have Tyson above him need their head testing. H2H you could make a case, but certainly not on resume.

 

Before the win over Frazier, Foreman wasn't much. But crushing an undefeated champion before destroying the nr. 1 contender will do a lot for your reputation. Holyfield was considered damaged goods before beating Tyson.

Never mind that he was top contender for 5+ years, at 34 he gave a 28 year old Holmes hell. The same Holmes who at 42 managed to make a prime Holyfield look quite ordinary. That was 7 years before Lewis beat Holyfield.

Frazier won every fight, except against Ali and Foreman, after loosing to Foreman the first time. Holyfield had lost to Moorer and Bowe before facing Lewis.

Sure, on average. But he met 19 of them, all in all.

What is a fact is that Ali over 20 years beat every fighter that was anything, with the exception of Machen and Holmes (whom he had had as a sparring partner).

If Lewis between 1983 and 2003 had beaten Page, Weaver, Thomas, Witherspoon, Holmes, Tyson, Biggs, Spinks, Tubbs, Berbick, Tucker, Smith, Holyfield, Ruddock, Morrison, Stewart, Holyfield, Williams, Bowe, Moorer, Foreman, Mercer, Tua, Ibeabuchi, Seldon, Briggs, McCall, Golota, Rahman, Byrd, Grant and a couple of others, he would have beat a comparable amount of top ranked guys.

This is more or less the guys Lewis beat x 2.

Just like Lewis shouldn't have had trouble with Bruno and Mercer?

Lyle was at least as skilled Bruno, Briggs, Tua, Morrisson, Golota, McCall, Rahman, Vitaly and Mercer, and more skilled than most of them.

You need to watch Ali-Shavers again (or for the first time?).

We've been through this haven't we?

If you think losing a decision with a broken jaw against Norton is worse than being KO'd by McCall you should really seek other hunting grounds.

 

Bottom half of the top ten for me.

 

Again, what were the betting odds for Foreman-Ali? Like I said before, the "unbeatable monster" is a BS myth created afterwards, to hype Ali even more than he was already hyped.

Who was the #5 worst heavyweight titlist of all-time according to Ring magazine experts, in 1981? The same man who argueably deserved two or three wins over Ali (broken jaw is just an excuse, he gave Ali hell in all three fights, despite not showing anything special in any of the 3, just repeating the same trick with the jab over and over again). A truly good boxer, Jimmy Young, outboxed Norton without much problem, but was robbed of decision.

Frazier beat whom exactly? Joe Bugner, who padded his record in Europe (look up European heavyweight ratings in the Ring, it's plain laughable), and who's list of top 3 wins would look something like Rudi ****rs, Henry Cooper and Richard Dunn? Quickly-fading Jimmy Ellis, in his next to last fight, with a 1-4-1 streak coming into the bout? Mediocre Jerry Quarry, who easily outpointed your super-skilled Ron Lyle, proving him what he was - limited crude puncher, yet that may be Quarry's biggest win in his whole career (argueable, depending how much you think Patterson had left when he lost to Quarry).

You can cut Ali's list of "contenders" almost by half without affecting his status anyhow. Alex Miteff, Alejandro Lavorante, Archie Moore (how old was he? just needed the money), George Chuvalo, Brian London, Karl Mildenberger, McArthur Foster, Floyd Patterson II, Bob Foster (total failure at heavyweight), Joe Bugner, Chuck Wepner, Joe Bugner, Alfredo Evangelista.

Lennox Lewis between 1983 and 2003? Pardon me? You want a 18-year old amateur turn pro and start at the top level at once?
Lewis-Bruno, Lennox's 4th year as a pro and only his 3rd top-class opponent. Ali struggled with much inferior opponents early in his career.

 

I rank Lewis over Holms any day of the week. Lewis didn't have the kiddy parade, and lots of who's(Ali retreads or unknowns at the time) King's work) in his record. and Out side of Ruiz, Lewis did fight everyone, was once "undisputed".
Holms was disputed and never unified, when it would have been easy to do so.
Today's list, in it changes.
1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Marcinaio
4. Lewis
5. Dempsey
6. Forman 1...could swap with Holyfield.
7. Holms..was only a splinter Champ

8. Holyfield.....stuck around too long.
9. Tyson....never really tried to be champ again
10. Frazier..best one eyed fighter of the batch....only one come to think of it.
/Liston/Johnson

 

You seem to be an angry young man.

Foreman was a 3-1 favourite. All the experts picked Foreman. Many were seriosuly concerned for Ali's health.

And if you think Foreman's that overrated, how do you explain that he gave Holyfield a good fight at 41? And that Holyfield himself gave Lewis a good fight at almost 40.

Norton was a top contender from 1973-1979, beat Ali, Quarry, Young (whatever you think about it) and ran Holmes close when past his prime. He was only clearly beat by big punchers.

If you can't accept this, there's no point in continuing this debate.

He took it kind of easy after FOTC, but the ones he beat, he beat clearly. He was actually more dominant the second time he beat Quarry (who was a top contender 1968-1973).

In any case he was younger than Ali, and arguably closer to his prime in all three meetings. There's no solid reason to claim otherwise.

The only reason for being as deragatory towards solid contenders as Quarry and Lyle as you are, is if you belive their era to be weak. If you do, I have to remind you that Foreman gave a lineal champion a better fight in 1991 than he gave a mere contender in 1977. Also, Holmes, who was Ali's sparring partner in 1975, was competitive at a world class level in the early 90's. A 40+ Holmes beat Mercer more clearly than Lewis did!

If Lennox hadn't lost to McCall and Rahman you would say they could have been cut from Lewis resume without making a difference. Well, he did and they couldn't.

Thing is, many of the guys listed above had qualities that could trouble anyone on a given day. And for most of them, fighting Ali was THE fight of their career since a win would mean so very much. Therefore they gave it their absolute all. Not that many had the same motivation against Lewis.

It was just to give an approximate comparison. Thing is, Ali beat everyone of note with the exceptions of Machen and Holmes during a 20 year period. Lewis comes far from claiming the same, even though he didn't suffer a long lay-off during his best years. (Neither did he have sparring partners as good as Ellis and Holmes.)

 

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Lewis / Foreman

5. Marciano / Holmes

7. Liston
8. Tyson
9. Frazier
10. Patterson


(This list only goes back as far as the Joe Louis era.
If we go back too far, The game is too different and the info too incomparable.

I'm always amused when I see Sam Langford compared to Vitali Klitschko or Lennox Lewis.

Why not John L ? Or Jack Broughton ? )

If I went back to to ww1 days, I would probably make it a list of 12 and slot in a pair of Jacks somewhere.

 

You call yourself Cuchulain and have no time for oldtimers?

 

Also Senya, could you please tell me in what ways you think Lewis's resume compares favourable to Ali's.