did lennox lewis have any flaws

Rahman had 41 stoppages in 50 wins he was a big puncher and Lewis basically gave him a free shot.

 

To me, he had very few faults. But could be overly relaxed at times, and sometimes didn't seem to have a firm game plan.

The Bruno bout springs to mind for both of those things.

Where as Bruno had a solid game plan and was totally switched on, Lewis came across in the early rounds to not have, and not be.

We all know that Lewis turned that around totally, but it was as he was being backed up by Bruno and it seemed more of a reactionary hail Mary shot he landed on Bruno rather than say, really good Lewis form.

I'm being a bit picky here, I know

 

Having 'no chin' at heavyweight, is something that would stop you from getting anywhere near the elite. Lennox had a chin that could ride most punches, those that he took, would've rocked most

 

Yes. His most obvious flaws were work ethic and arrogance.

 

I agree with this, and it seems like many here also agree that Lennox could lose focus from time to time and I see it as a definite flaw too. Someone mentioned his left hand, I don't see that as a flaw at all, he had a great jab.

Another thing that was mentioned is the way Lennox reacts to Super aggressive Fighters. I don't think he would do well at all against a really Superior aggressive type fighter, ala George Foreman or Sonny Liston or Joe Frazier, guys like that. Lennox would not be laughing in the ring with George Foreman I guarantee you that LOL.

 

He was clearly the best HW of the past few decades but wasn't the best by a wide margin and it can be chalked up to his size. His combination of size, speed and skills is just really hard to deal with for smaller opponents. The guys who KO'd Lewis had reaches almost as long as Lewis. If you're looking for a connection between those losses thats the easiest one. He didn't fight Bowe who was probably the 2nd best HW of his era and certainly the biggest and most powerful one.

Theres vulnerabilties there against HWs his size but his 2-0-1(really 3-0) against Holyfield and Tyson with no unavenged losses is better than what anyone else brings to the table. Lewis's SOS wasn't great for a champ fighting in his era, Tysons SOS was actually a little better. When you win the big fights that matters less then if you lose them.

 

no footwork
overrated jab
below average handspeed

he’s a joke. beating bums like mercer, briggs, and shot zombies like 2002 tyson doesn’t make u an atg.

 

We all know his chin was a liability so don't need to go on too much about that.

He was vulnerable to jabs (Mercer, Holyfield 2 , Rahman 1 etc). If you jabbed with him in center ring you could have success. Even 2002 Tyson out jabbed him in round 1 of their fight.

His balance and footwork were poor but it improved under Steward.

 

tyson in 2002 was a journeyman mentally and physically and was shot beyond repair. i mean was literally 234, 15 lbs higher than he was against golota. look at his interviews at that time he shouldn’t have been in a boxing ring.

and holyfield in 99 was not the same as the holyfield who beat tyson. Holyfield the previous year struggled against Vaughn Bean, a guy who had only faced 4 dudes with a winning record before. Wasn’t the same holyfield who was taking riddick bowe to war

 

Foreman would put him in a stretcher.

 

Facts on the arrogance. This dude constantly talks about his win against tyson like he fought some 88 trained tyson who was ruling the division.

He fought a shot zombie in tyson and a retire worthy holyfield.

 

I've seen Lewis hit mitts with Courtney Shand in-person at Sully's boxing gym (circa 99-02) and I remember being a bit underwhelmed. He probably wasn't going all out though.

 

He got KO'd twice by fighters people would now call mediocre opponents. Some would call that a flawed fighter, but I just think it showed his human side.

Some might remark that when watching extended footage and not just highlights he looked very sloppy. But don't let that take away from the highlights.

A good example of his incredible skills would be the Vitali fight, where he got hit plenty because he wasn't fighting some shorter opponent like usual, but still won. Some would say that if he'd fought a KO-artist there like Wlad he'd have been KO'd cold. Maybe so. But he was fighting attrition-puncher Vitali and Lewis' big boxing IQ knew that and so decided to do a drunken brawl. Clever fighter!

 

His resume is better than Tysons

 

I think you're being somewhat unfair and lacking nuance here. Yes, Lewis did not beat the best versions of Holyfield and Tyson. And I think most people accept that. But his career resume overall is very impressive. He beat some good fighters across different generations of heavyweights. He deserves credit for that.
I agree that Tyson was way past his best. But, in fairness to Lewis, he was mandatory for Tyson in 1996 and Mike chose a different path. Holyfield is a bit trickier IMO. Yes he was past his best in 1999, but struggling against Vaughan Bean doesn't necessarily tell the whole story. Holyfield was always somewhat inconsistent at top level. And Lewis was a clear underdog going into that one, as I remember. I don't necessarily disagree with your main points but I think the bigger picture of Lewis 's career is still very positive.