Holmes vs Lewis, better competition?

Holmes would have toyed with all Lewis`s opponents except Holyfield.

 

Grant was badly exposed just before he fought Lewis in a fight against lower opposition he was badly hurt proving he had no defense or chin, Shavers would have destroyed him, Briggs and Shavers would have been highly entertaining, both fighters were easy to hit.

 

So you agree with me ?

You're not so sure about Holmes beating ALL of Lewis's opponents.

 

Mason wouldn`t have been a Top 10 contender during Holmes`s era.

 

Holmes wins were better. Most of his opposition rose to the occasion; came into the ring in the best shape of their lives, were mostly all a good deal younger and undefeated. Hell, Tim Witherspoon (who was at his best the night he fought Holmes) could beat all of Lewis comp.

Aging Holyfield (looked faded after Vaughn Bean fight, and stopped by Bowe)
Ruddock (Tyson took it all out of him following their 2 wars; Ruddock never even remotely the same)
Morrison (already sick with AIDS and having been stopped in one round by Michael Bent)
Tua (was WAY to heavy for a man of his stature. Best version vs. Ike could whack Lewis and point win on workrate)
Ray Mercer (already schooled by Holmes who was 42-years old! Prime Lewis barely won again past prime Mercer)
Oliver McCall (recently out from rehab. and at his most unstable. He still won the 2nd round again Lewis. Just as their first encounter, where McCall dominated til k.o'ing Lennox. McCall could have had Lewis number. MCCALL! yes, who had previously been taken the distance by a 45-year old Holmes and nearly (should have) got held to a draw!

 

I wonder if the version of Lennox (pre Steward-- that struggled against Bruno) could have taken on Witherspoon the night Tim fought Holmes? I think Tim would've put in a similar close performance to Lennox like Mercer did. I know a few who think Mercer won against Lewis.

I think Ken Norton beats Rahman both versions that fought Lewis. Rahman IMO got a fluke win over Lennox. I think Norton has enough pop to his shots to do similar. Not a one punch KO, but accumulation of shots. Since Maskaev tired out Rahman both times, Norton tires him easier.

I think Norton could also beat McCall, Akinwande, Grant too. More than likely Ken get's KTFO'd by the Tua that refused to show up against Lennox.
I say Lennox fought the better comp, but I think an early Lennox possibly loses to TW & maybe Norton.

Flip the script, I think a prime Holmes in Lewis era, looks fabulous over Ruddock, Grant, Tua, Golota, McCall, Rahim, beat Mercer any prime or out of prime.
Loses to Holyfield 2 out of 3 and gets drubbed by Vitali in any era, due to how Vitali uses his reach, jab & height

 

Nothing much happened in the McCall v Lewis fight till the KO and Lewis improved vastly after that.

 

I agree with all of that except I feel Lewis that struggled v Bruno would fall to land any right hands on Witherspoon.

 

(fails) to land right hands on Witherspoon? If that is your take I agree as well. Only the Emanuel Steward version of Lennox beats T Witherspoon.

 

So?

My opinion is that your opinion is wrong.

Grant was unbeaten when he fought Lewis. That's a poor post. Why, it could apply to Holmes as well, and make just as much sense. Except for I'll actually name the boxer.

Watch this:

"Holmes was badly exposed in a fight against lower opposition he was badly hurt proving he had no defense or chin getting dropped by Snipes."

Good stuff, eh?

Shavers couldn't destroy 21-24 Bob Stallings, nor could he destroy 37-21 Ron Stander, nor could he destroy featherfist Randall Cobb. In fact, he lost to all of them. You have no guarantee whatsoever that a fine fighter like 35-0 Grant would not have put Shavers on a stretcher himself.

These fighters were in the Ring top 10 at one time or another when Holmes was fighting:

David Bey http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/564
James Broad http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/611
Leon Spinks http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/262
James Tillis http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/803
Lorenzo Zanon http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/2183
Scott LeDoux http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/8624

I think that not only is Mason as good as or better than them, but that he'd give other top 10 guys of the time a good run for their money.

 

He got a gift decision against a near 50 year Foreman.

 

The competition Holmes faced later in he career makes it pretty damn close and maybe even swings it his way, but he never really had a shot at beating guys like Holyfied and Tyson who were at that damn near best when he fought them. I prefer Lewis and rate him a couple of places higher than Holmes, so naturally I'd favour Lewis, but in all honesty it's really not that hard to make a case for Holmes.

 

Lennox Lewis

 

Koki Kameda

 

I agree with you that Briggs was still a very good fighter. He could not carry his devastating 1 round KO record against the best competition, but was still a top contender.

But the fight against Foreman is a bad example.
Do you believe contrary to popular opinion he actually deserved that decision?
And Foreman was a bit shy of 49 years old there. His showing against Briggs was somewhat more impressive than the reverse.