Does Lewis get to little or to much credit for beating Holyfield and Tyson

Even though I think Lewis has had a better hw career than Holyfield, who I think is better p4p and has had a better career given his stint at Cruiser, I too enjoy reading well thought out positions, regardless of which side a poster supports. Too me the presentation of the argument is more interesting than supporting either fighter A or B. It's just too bad that in this case you're all wrong...

 

It didn't help his legacy much as far as I can see. Having a fight too late is not better than not having it at all because it can give a result totally different than what would have happened in a prime vs prime matchup.

Muhammad Ali was competitive against Trevor Berbick after the Holmes fight and Berbick was better than any of the guys Tyson faced after fighting Lewis including the guys who stopped him. This may be an indication that he had more left than Tyson did.

 

Well just two things

Firstly i really don't think Tyson was totally shot as you do

Secondly should all fighters say no i'm not going to fight you, you're a bit past your peak so push along? Fights like Foreman - Moorer. Oops, hang on, Foreman won.

Under your thought we would never see great upsets like Foreman - Moorer, Duran - Barkley et al. This is boxing, and unfortunately we are seldom going to see these ideal scenario's.

Hindsight is beautiful, but if Tyson landed a big left hook and Lewis was stopped like say in the Rahman fight we'd never hear the end of it. If he wins he still had something left but if he loses we'll call Tyson shot. It's the same scenario with Holyfield.

 

You've hit on something that bothers me too. You can't have a fight where one fighter already has a built in excuss as to why they lost, if that's the case, why even bother, because then it's only about the money and how it can extracted from us, the fans.

 

Actually, I would have concluded that he won DESPITE being shot.

 

One criteria which I think is useful in rating guys is how many hihly ranked opponnents they beat. However, the issue of ratings seems to be rather subjective. How would people on this forum rate the heavyweights in 2002? Where would you place Tyson? I think the Tyson win is meaningful in that Tyson was arguably still in the top 10 or so. I don't mean to say the Tyson win means nothing at all only that Tyson recent activity did not seem to warrant a ranking near that of Holyfield when he fought Lewis.

 

The fighter does'nt really have the excuse for losing......they just try to win under the circumstance.
If you're old for a fighter, a victory over that fighter has to be taken in its proper context, because age does play a factor in boxing.

JT mentioned Duran and Barkley.

Duran got major credit, and he should have, he beat a younger and much bigger fighter than he was.
.....but even those like myself who give Duran the credit for that Barkley performance, also took note that Duran did'nt beat a great fighter.
It was a great win for Duran under the circumstances.....which was that he was fighting a much younger Barkley at well past his prime and giving up alot of physical advantages.

Had Barkley beat Duran, it would have gone down in history that he beat a shell of Duran, and rightfully so, because that was a shell of the great Duran that reigned supreme up to the 1st Leonard fight.

Duran in that instance beat a good fighter, not a great one, and he became the champion.

Now, whoever beats Duran after he just beat Barkley.....does he deserve the accolades because he beat the great Roberto Duran??????

.....he may deserve credit for beating Roberto Duran, but certainly he would'nt deserve credit for beating the Great Roberto Duran, because at that point, Duran was far from the great fighter from his lightweight days.

To get back on the subject of Evander Holyfield.....regaining a portion of the Heavyweight title today is not going to make him all of a sudden the Great Evander Holyfield.
If Sultan beats him, he's not beating a great fighter.
Likewise, if Holyfield beats Sultan, a great fighter did'nt just beat Sultan....its the shell of what once was a great fighter that was still good enough to beat Sultan.


Vanboxingfan, money and name recognition is exactly why young great champions or even prospects want to fight former greats.
Even after Lennox Lewis easily destroyed Tyson, Lewis was ready to take Tyson to court and force him to a rematch he did'nt want.

Why do you think Lennox wanted to force Tyson into another fight when when he had just destroyed him and Tyson did'nt want to fight Lennox again????
Exactly, Money and name recognition.
Lewis could care less about fighting a better fighter who deserved a shot at his title, money and again beating the name Mike Tyson, was much more important to Lewis.

 

:twisted: What about my scorecards???:twisted:



I'm proud of my scorecards!!! :thumbsup

 

Well that's a bit simpler. Tyson still had a bit left, his speed and power made him still dangerous. Holyfield was still a double champ tho of course so nobody is going to be mixing the two up per quotient.

 

So that wasn't Tyson begging Lewis for a rematch post fight? Didn't Tyson thank Lewis for the money?

 

Say I'm wrong JT?

Say it was'nt Lewis who was about to take or took Tyson to court to force him to oblige by a contract they had both signed for two fights!

The contracts Tyson and Lewis signed speculated two fight......
.....but who in their right mind is going to force the other to oblige when the first contest was so onesided.....

It was'nt just a KO, it was a boxing lesson, a whipping, a beatdown, then came the KO........

......and Lennox still wanted to force Tyson to oblige by the contracts and sign for a rematch! :nut :-( :nut


Say I'm lying JT!

 

I'm not aware of the pre fight contracts and stuff and have no doubt you are right, but there was Tyson literally begging Lewis for another fight and more money right after dragging his bloodied body off the canvas. Given the extent of the thrashing it's quite likely he changed his mind later after bearing the bruises and cuts for a week or so.

 

I have a very different understanding of how this unfolded. My understanding is that TYSON, not Lewis exercised a rematch clause and then steps were made to set up the rematch, and significant costs were incurred and somewhere along the line Tyson changed his mind.

I hope someone can shed some light on this because these are two completely different scenarios. Time to Google!

And here's what I found so far.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/specials/lewis_v_tyson_fight/2034090.stm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennox_Lewis


In May 2003, Lewis sued boxing promoter Don King for $385 million, claiming that King used threats to have Tyson pull out of a rematch scheduled with Lewis for a month later

 

I don't put GREAT stock in Lewis' massively lopsided beating of Holy in (1) or his less one-sided but still decisive victory in (2). Holyfield was already on his way out. (Funny, considering he's going to get another shot at a title 7 or 8 years later)

I put nearly NO stock in his KO of a well-past-it Tyson.

That said, I believe Lewis would probably have prevailed against prime Tyson and/or prime Holyfield.

Ali beat an old Moore. Anyone think he couldn't have beaten a prime Moore?

 

Holyfield's form was actually good leading up to and after the Lewis fights, his victories over Mercer, Moorer, Tyson, Bean, Ruiz and Rahman confirm this, he was still beating top fighters so no, he wasn't shot when he faced Lewis, not quite the fighter who'd given us the trilogy with Bowe but he was still decent. Tyson on the other hand was close to being shot, not the mere shell that we witnessed against Williams or McBride but not far off but Lewis was slipping himself by that stage, so it was still a good victory.