How many more losses would Lennox Lewis have if he fought these 5 fighters?

And I think you're overestimating the supposed increased quality of opposition, which is minimal at best on the whole.

 

That might be "obvious" to you in your mind, but not for me. What IS obvious to me is that many people here boasting that Lewis would lose 2 or more bouts are simply looking for ways to undermine Lewis' magnificent career any way they can.

:smoke

 

That whole thing was a heaping pile of BS to begin with. Grant was the guy who was viewed as the consensus #3 guy at that time. Ruiz was known as the guy who lost to Tua in 19 seconds. It was a Don King orchestrated shameful fiasco!

So Lewis beats Holyfield (twice in reality, but once officially), so Lewis is stripped of the WBA so that 2 entirely undeserving Don King fighters - Holyfield and Ruiz - fought for the vacant strap when Lewis took on the guy who was considered the "heir apparent". Then Holyfield and Ruiz would go on to have one of the most forgettable trilogies in boxing history.

Disgusting political nonsense, and nothing more.

 

If you genuinely believe Lewis loses 2 of those 5 matches - 3 against guys whom he already beat, and 2 against guys who never amounted to anything more than fringe top 10 guys (at best), I don't know what to tell you.

Now if you replaced Botha with '73 Foreman instead of a career journeyman like the grossly overrated Corrie Sanders, you might have something here.

:smoke

 

1. I'm not sure that Sanders is much better than Botha, if at all.

2. Even if he was that much better than him, he was still light years short of where Lewis was at that time.

3. At the time Lewis fought Botha, it was considered a stay-busy fight while he was hoping for a Tyson fight but settling for Tua. He had just fought the top 2 available opponents in 3 consecutive bouts going into that one.

:smoke