Bigger upset at the time: Rahman-Lewis or Tarver-Jones?

Still close Lads. Jones Tarver up by 15 13 as of now

 

1-This is incorrect. Lennox was a hefty 250 against Botha and 249 against Tua. The Tua fight in particular he fought a very safe boring fight and the blank droopy look on his face was basically "I'm just here for a paycheck". Took no risks at all, which isn't a mark against him (he's getting paid to fight), but the point I'm making is that he was both getting fatter and fatter and clearly no longer had his heart in boxing. He usually weighed between 235-245 and the extra lbs just kept adding up.

The only thing you wrote that was technically correct is that he did what he was supposed to do as a professional but no, he was not in great shape and his heart was not in boxing. He was just going through the motions. The Rahman fight was a blessing in disguise. He had grown arrogant, disinterested, and lazy BEFORE the Rahman fight and other posters who kept up with the era back then have said the same thing in this very thread!

2-You are actually helping my argument with this comment. Everyone expected Roy to wake up and humiliate Tarver since he wasn't himself in the 1st fight. That's why it was even more shocking!

I didn't say he was as shopworn as Holyfield but he was certainly more shopworn than Roy. The Mercer fight was a very brutal war, Mercer bloodied Lennox's face with his heavy jabs and pressure and some thought Lennox lost. He took some heavy blows in the Briggs fight and was unofficially knocked down. The 1st Holyfield fight was a clear win but declared a draw and the 2nd fight was very close and full of action. You're missing the point, the public had heard Lennox scored a draw (on paper) and this was in addition to his KO loss to McCall. He had 2 very close fights with Mercer and Holyfield and he was getting flabbier and less passionate. So yes, losing to a guy like Rahman was shocking but by your own admission nobody perceived him as this invincible dominant champion. Roy was. This is important because Lennox losing was expected by some people to get caught slipping at some point; people who were noticing all of this and he was always seen as a vulnerable fighter regardless of the odds or quality of the opponent. PERCEPTION is everything for a fighter's reputation and aura.

You cannot compare all that to Roy having ONE close fight after a decade of utter domination. Lennox's career was like a constant yo yo even back in the amateurs. Lost in the olympics and did the unthinkable spending another FOUR YEARS just to finally get gold while his peers had by then already become champions or contenders (tyson, bowe, hoylfield, etc). The perception way back then was that he had to play catch up and people were skeptical about how good he even was despite his gold medal (because of how long it took). It wasn't until the ruddock fight that writers took him seriously, but the McCall fight quickly put a wet blanket over that spark. He had to earn people's respect all over again. The Morrison fight helped some but then he went and had a brutal close fight with Mercer whom some felt he should have lost to so Lennox was in a very weird position. He was clearly a threat at 6'5 and 240 lbs with power and technique but he had yet to convince the casual market or the hardcores. The McCall rematch was supposed to be sweet vengeance and put him back on the map but that was a complete farce due to his mental condition. He finally started gaining traction with solid wins over Briggs and Golota and he was finally the clear #1 or #2 and fought Holyfield to settle the score. But I've already covered how those fights didn't help the perception at all.

Compare that to Jones utter domination in the Olympics and losing by pure robbery, then going on to terrorize multiple weight classes and barely losing any rounds at all. The guys who were supposed to challenge him like James Toney and Hopkins he beat them without a mark on him. He did the unthinkable and beat a heavyweight (also without getting dropped or busted up). He was basically a super hero and had a similar aura to Tyson, Robinson, Chavez, etc. Tarver was the ONLY moment where people scratched their heads but by YOUR own admission that was seen as a bump in the road and that the "real' Roy would show up.

So reading the above, how can you possibly think that the Lennox vs Rahman fight was more shocking? The perceived lack of a threat coming from Rahman is not relevant because of how vulnerable Lennox looked throughout his entire career. Jones was NOT seen as vulnerable and it would not take much research to discover this even if you didn't follow boxing. And if you factor in Roy's super multi media star status as both the biggest PPV attraction along with his acting and rap careers and it's simply ludicrous to claim people were more shocked with Lennox losing. I know because I lived through that era and remember how many people were talking about it. It was a similar feeling to when Pacquiao got knocked out by Marquez, the whole world stopped and even non boxing fans were curious because they may have heard of Roy at some point or seen a clip of him fighting.

You just proved my point once again!

Even the small % of people who thought Roy might lose DID NOT expect him to lose in such a devastating fashion, period! Lennox was perceived as vulnerable and that the possibility of a surprise KO loss was always in the back of our minds due to the McCall loss and the fact it was the heavyweights division full of heavy hitters!

 

My Join Date is 2004, that seems to mean something skimming through the posts. I was here before that as well and if memory serves the site went down for a while and then came back. I guess it came back in 2004 as that’s my join date. I Also started watching hardcore in the mid 1980’s. So I was 100% front and center for both of these fights.

Both were obviously big upsets but to me Jones was Superman. And by comparison Lewis always seemed vulnerable, I feel like Lewis has gained more post career than any Heavyweight I can remember. Many thought even that corpse of Tyson might do him in. He just wasn’t universally respected back then, he wasn’t even on the same planet as Jones as far as the invincibility factor.

Most of us thought Jones would be Jones again in his rematch with Tarver. The last guy that really tested Jones got smashed in 1 round in the rematch, Montell Griffin. Other than Mike Tyson in the 80s I’m not sure I remember another fighter that seemed as unbeatable in all my years of watching boxing.

I was dialed in to Rahmans chances back then. He had a big right hand and was a very underrated heavyweight. But honestly It’s not even about Rahman or any disrespect on my part for Lewis it’s just as simple as Roy Jones seemed unbeatable.

The way I saw it.

 

Interesting point. In my previous post I pointed out how it was a bigger upset when Jones lost because of his “Invincibility” factor. But I specifically remember having a house full of adults like myself packed in there to watch Jones Tarver 2 so obviously people thought that was a real fight. When I watched Lewis - Rahman 1! it was with one guy (another hardcore) so to play the other side of the fence the fact that I didn’t have a houseful meant most people probably didn’t give Rahman a shot. I can’t remember with that fight being in Africa if it was shown at a weird time over here. I don’t think it was I feel like it was still in prime time here in the US.

Both were big upsets. My only point was it was more of a shock to me to see Roy Jones lose then Lennox Lewis.

 

You cannot make the conversation focused solely on the fact Rahman was a fringe contender and was given very low odds of winning. Your whole argument falls apart when you try to ignore the casual market and the popularity and perception of both fighters. That's why you keep steering the conversation away.

As for the manner in which they lost, that is absolutely important! Do you think there'd be so many people going crazy over Wilder's first official loss had Fury simply outboxed him? It was the WAY Fury brought the fight to the scary puncher and dismantled him that got people talking.

Similarly, NOBODY thought Jones would get annihilated by savage knock out. Ive already admitted that there was a small minority who thought Tarver might pull off an upset but Big Ukranian already admitted that most people thought the vulnerabilities Roy displayed was due to an off-night (weight draining, lack of a good game plan, etc). It had less to do with Tarver being on Roy's level and an amazing boxer and more about if Roy simply hit a bump in the road and would go back to being "invincible".

I would say it was similar to how the super dominant Joe Louis looked vulnerable against guys like Walcott or Baer for brief moments and then took care of business winning by brutal KO in the rematches. People had a similar mind set and that a 100% focused Roy would embarrass Tarver. Again, I know there were people wondering if Tarver could pull it off but NOBODY thought Roy would get savagely KO'd.

So yes, technically speaking Rahman beating Lewis was a bigger upset "on paper" due to the "odds" and that he was an obscure contender while Tarver was fairly known and had a close fight with Roy in their first match. That is all true. But in reality, there were far more people tuned into the Roy Tarver fight and far more people were shocked by Roy's loss. There were far more people talking about Roy's loss and shocked by it simply by virtue of the fact he was A) way more popular and B) was seen as the most invincible guy since prime Tyson while Lewis was neither very popular nor ever remotely seen as unbeatable. This is an observable, historical fact.

If there were social media back then Roy's loss would have gone viral with hundreds of reaction videos within 24 hours. You and I know both know Lewis' loss wouldn't have generated a quarter of the same fuss.

 

Roy Jones Jr's loss to Antonio Tarver easily was the shocker. With Lennox Lewis's style it was just a matter of time.

 

What a lot of people don't seem to appreciate, is that it took a long time for it to dawn on the public, how good Lewis actually was.

He wasn't a champion like Tyson who generated excitement from early in his career, he had to earn his hard won reputation one fight at a time.

So nobody expected Rahman to beat him, but it didn't exactly turn the world upside down either.

Jones on the other hand hand was considered nigh on unbeatable.

 

He was considered the best heavyweight in the world, but not by a huge margin. A lot of people picked Tua and Tyson to beat him for example. He was still regarded with a degree of skepticism.

 

Jones was seen as being a contender for the pound for pound all time great.

He was up here, and the rest of the top ten were down here.

Odds are not necessarily a good indicator of how much of an upset something was seen as.

There was no reason to pick Rahman, other than the punchers chance.

That is going to result in long odds, but it doesn't mean that everybody is shocked if it happens.

A lot of people expected somebody to crack Lewis's chin again eventually, they just didn't want to commit to picking who would do it.

 

It might sound incredible today, but the Tyson fight was the turning point in Lewis's legacy.

That was when the penny finally dropped!

 

Tarver over Jones. Jones was undefeted, and taken out by one punch Everyone knows Lewis could be taken out by one punch, and Rahman certainly could punch, so to me that upset was less of a surprise.