@Classics. If Lennox Lewis never losted. Can he be considered top 3 ATG HW?

no they don't. There's no other way to say this: no they don't.

An unbeaten fighter takes on an aura that allows a far higher ranking than would otherwise be the case. Marciano running at 47-2 would inarguably be rated lower in an overall sense than he is now. The idea that Lewis gets treated as a 43-0 fighter in his general ranking, that he was ranked #5 by ESB in Rummie's poll as a 43-0 fighter is a spurious claim, it makes no sense!

But he was. That sort of thing happens in fights all the time. And he is rated accordingly.

Who he thrashed/beat. Lewis lost what, two rounds against Vitali? That's hardly "outclassed technically" ffs.

Who puts him in that type of company!? Anyone that ranks Lewis alongside Ali and Louis is a clown, just as anyone who ranks Wlad, Frazier or Foreman in that class is a clown. You may be able to find one or two people that do that, but no more than do it for the other fighters i mentioned.

 

:deal

 

Your avatar, wtf

 

Because it's glaringly obvious??

I think there's something to that, but I think a close look dispels these notions. I also think that winning is better than losing

Lower.

 

But there are posters who "overrank" every fighter regardless, who make excuses for every fighter's losses. Literally.

The notion that Lewis is generally seen or regarded by "most people" as an undefeated fighter is ridiculous.

Maybe he won three, I don't know, but Vitali's eye falling out of his socket is the most important factor I think.

And that's fine, rankings are so soft after the top 2, i don't really give a ****. People rank Dempsey, Foreman, Maricano, Holmes and Jack Johnson at #3, too, making a case for Lewis above those guys is easy.