Holmes or Lewis?

About even. For what its worth Frank Warren who promoted Lewis felt Holmes was better.

 

Lewis i have just one spot above Holmes. Holmes dodging a few bullets latter career lets Lewis ease past him for me. 3 and 4 incidently.

 

I agree about them being very close in ability. Regarding the Frank Warren stuff, could you post that on here, or possibly PM the remarks to me? I'd never read that before and am interested.

Thanks!

 

What is your opinion regarding the Lewis losses, John? I tend to consider them in ranking

 

Well he avenged both. I accept the theory he was cocky and a bit under-prepared vs Rahman as shown IMO by his totally dominant rematch win. A true show of greatness and self confidence axing a guy that had just axed himself. I think he was not given his fair chance to fight on vs McCall and show us what he had under fire. A Larry Holmes for example has been in worse states than Lewis and allowed to fight on, he even won. He was also pre peak vs McCall and Steward said he would go thru his weakness which they did. After this Lewis was trained by Steward and shored his technique up noticably.

I believe others i rate below him have more prominent area's of worry.

Holyfield for instance at his best lost two fights in a trilogy and came out second best to a consensus non top tenner. Tyson's fall when it came was very very ugly. Foreman lacks some resume to be top 3 IMO. Marciano pushes but he just misses out on the 4.

 

This is very much the way I see it... just thought I would ask an expert!

 

Joe was already past his prime, dmt.

 

Holmes, just. Lewis is there right behind at #4. There's only a hair's breadth between the two. Reasons: A longer unbroken title reign, head-to-head the slightly more formidable fighter (IMHO).

 

One great win (though Frazier was unfocused and overweight) doesn't make up for a long string of beaten top contenders, something Foreman didn't do. Foreman also showed he could never get past a skilled boxer with a chin, while Lewis could adapt to every style as he beat every man he ever faced.


I think both Holmes and Lewis rank highly, but i rank Lewis slightly ahead. He was more consistent in facing the top contenders and as JT put nicely, Holmes dodged a few bullets late in his career while Lewis at age 37 beat Vitali Klitschko, who in my opinion was a better fighter than anyone Holmes faced (not resume wise, though).

 

That's only one small part of the equation. Foreman's win record is pretty bare past two names, say three counting Moorer. He had no big string of defenses etc. Holmes and Lewis were dominant champs for some time, Lewis in two splits. Foreman doesn't have enough defenses or a long enough reign for me to put him above.

 

Hahaha, no worries. Chris is the resident Lewis king with a few others just below. I just sit back and admire their work lol

 

I'd say Holmes.

Better durability, one of the few guys with an even better jab, and was able to fight on respectably into his mid 40s.

 

I rank Holmes higher all time, and give him the nod head to head as well.
I have both in my top 10, and only have them around 2 place from one another. Had Lewis been able to get a shot at Riddick Bowe, and succeded, I may feel differently.

I think Holmes difference in hand speed would be the key element in defeating Lewis. If you watch both perform against Mercer, even the older Holmes hands seemed faster. Mercer seemed bigger and stronger vs. Lewis than he did against Holmes, I'm not saying Holmes necesarily beat a better Mercer.