Do you respect Hasim Rahman as a 2 Time Champ?

I think the fact that he rebounded like he did to regain the crown was awesome. A lot of guys don't manage to regroup like that.

He went on a catastrophic skid, losing to Lewis, Holyfield, Ruiz, and the draw against Tua (should have been a win, both looked like sh!t though). Then he fought a tune up against Al 'Ice' Cole and still looked grossly overweight and disinterested. Apparently Rahman was so exhausted he threw up afterward.

That struggle convinced him he needed to start from scratch. He refocused on training, fought three more tune up fights and then turned in arguably the best, most focused performance of his career, beating the brakes of Kali Meehan, who was at his own career zenith. Sure, losing again to Oleg was really embarrassing, but I give him enormous credit for the career resurgence.

Other heavyweight should take note that that is the correct way to do a comeback.

 

Yes.

Rahman was solid contender who got lucky that Lewis picked him as an easy stay-busy fight in 2001.

I will remind you what happened.

In 2000 Lennox seemed unbeatable when he demolished MIchael Grant and Francois Botha, and then schooled Tua (IBF#1 contender).

The megafight vs Tyson was planned, but not for early 2001. Lewis thought about defending his title against well-known, but not dangerous opponent.

There were options like Larry Donald and Ray Mercer (rematch) - Mercer turned 40 in 2001.

In Feb 2001 two boxers were named as possible Lewis' opponents: David Izon and Hasim Rahman. Hard to say now who was rated higher of these two. Both looked solid contenders, but not good enough to even slightly trouble Lennox.

Lewis knew it, too. His team picked Rahman. They could've easily picked Izon and we would've never had one of the greatest upsets in boxing history.

Lennox underestimated Rahman and paid the price.

Hasim was in great shape and came very focused, he was one of the very few who thought he has a chance.

And the rest is history. Hasim Rahman stays in boxing history as a former undisputed HW champion, which were not too many as you know.

 

And Toney clearly beat him the second time.

 

2x world champion, of course I respect him. I respect my postman, let alone a champion boxer.

 

I agree that Walcott beat a better group of lightheavies (Bivins, Maxim, Johnson, Charles) with the caveat that Rahman didn't have the luxury of fighting Virgil Hill, Henry Maske and Antonio Tarver.

As far as being the oldest champ, I see it as more of a case of Walcott outlasting his contemporaries and hitting gold at a nadir in the division's history. That's as much a case of great timing as great fighting.

OK, I am running out of gas defending Rahman.

 

They didn't just keep giving him title shot's out of sympathy.

They kept giving him title shots because the decisions kept being controversial!

 

Hmmm... Rahman made sure his title shot against Lewis was void of controversy. Apparently there is a way to do that.

 

Fair enough.

So the guy that he won the title off, must have been pretty awful right?

 

He was a top 3 All Time Heavyweight. Makes that win all the more spectacular.

Thanks for strengthening my case.

 

Lewis is not a TOP 3 All time Heavyweight no matter how generous you are.

 

There a better case for #2 than there is for #6 for Lewis.

But I will take Lewis at #4 if you insist on Holmes at #3.

BTW, this discussion was ridden hard, flogged and put away wet in another thread.

 

Lewis at number 2???

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

There's a case. I'm not making it. I'll stick with #3.

But I'm sure someone will tell me how Marciano was better knocking over a bunch of bowling pins or Dempsey taking out his scripted patsies.

 

Seamus, todays cruiserweights are as big as Ali if your going to argue that Walcott's opponents were actually light heavies and not really heavyweights than one could just as easily argue that Ali was just a cruiserweight, food for thought.