Evander Holyfield vs Lennox Lewis

Duran was awesome against SRL and Palomino, he hadn't slackened off in any way shape or form up until that point. Up until this point Duran pretty much hadn't found a way to lose as well, unless underdone and facing De Jesus but he more than made up for that one.

I would rate Floyd higher than a lot on here but i struggle to choose him to win agaisnt the likes of Duran and SRL.

 

Fair enough.

 

I am still disappointed that Lennox took the low road to collect both WBC belts. The WBC has a history of pulling this sh*t: stripping Leon Spinks for rematching Ali, stripping Holmes for not facing Greg Page, Bowe dumping the belt in the trash, Lewis receiving the shot against McCall after stripping Tyson, and so on.

I like dominant reigns. Now you might say Lennox wasn't champ until he beat Holyfield. But he did have a title and didn't lose another fight until 2001.

I'm headed out for a while. I'll need to get back in this discussion.

 

Well said. This is my view also.

 

Those were two examples where the champion was at fault.. Not the WBC.. Holmes and Bowe were rightfully stripped for failure to face their mandatory challengers. Especially Bowe who signed a contract BEFORE even facing Holyfield that he'd meet Lewis then reneged on it.

 

Lewis did the same when he failed to defend the WBA title against Ruiz.

 

Exactamundo! Now what was the situation with Byrd and the IBF?

 

I think there were more politics involved with both cases and I'm not so sure we got the whole scoop of what went down. I'm on my phone so apologies this is short. I'll be back.

 

I hope you was not trying to talk in spanish when you wrote it

 

Maybe it's just me, but I see a big difference between Bowe avoiding the obvious number one challenger, who beat him in the Olympics and he signed a contract to fight, verse Lewis avoiding a fighter who in their estimation wasn't marketable or really never showed any indication he could beat Lewis. Except of the injury to Vitali, both Klitschko's had no problems beating Byrd.

 

Lewis signed a contract that obliged him to fight the WBA #1 contender, John Ruiz.
Then arranged a fight with Michael Grant instead.

The Lewis-Bowe saga has been well covered many times and it is not quite so simple and one-sided as some people still believe. History has been kind to Lewis's camp regarding that.

 

Posters who think Ruiz would even have a chance of beating any version of Lewis confuse me. At least I could envision a quick southpaw like Byrd being competitive for a few rounds, but Ruiz?? He'd be lucky to get past the 2nd round. Grant was thought to be a much more formidable opponent at the time.

But if people want to call these "ducks" they're welcome to I guess, but the reality was that Lewis was getting towards the tail end of his career and was looking for big money fights.

History has been fair regarding Bowe for two main reasons. One, being it was the best two fighters who would have been fighting, and secondly it was also the most marketable fight to be made. Thirdly, one would think Bowe would want to beat him for pride alone, to revenge his Olympic loss against him.

 

My spanish is much better than your english. :deal

Mi español es mejor que su inglés. :freddy

Eres un pedazo de espalda mojado sucio de mierda!

 

I didn't call it a "duck" or express an opinion on Ruiz's chances of beating Lewis.
I am pointing out that Lennox Lewis reneged on a contract to fight Ruiz, #1 WBA contender. A signed contract.
Part of the accusation against Bowe makes an issue of a "signed contract".

All of your points assume that Bowe's camp were completely unopen to fighting Lewis in 1993, and that Lewis's camp were completely willing and fully committed.
That's where the history has been distorted.