how much credit do you give lewis for his rematch win over mccall?

The fights with McCall and Rahman were big fights. He was WBC champion in one and rated by many as the #1 HW at the times, and undisputed champion in the other. Against hungry contenders on winning streaks coming to take his crown.

These weren't small hall undercard prelims or some bum-of-the-month tour defences, these were big fights occuring while he was on a two or three fights a year schedule, training camps and big pay.

 

There is no comparison between the McCall and Rahman 1 fights whatsoever as far as Lewis being focused is concerned. In McCall 1 he was fit and well conditioned, throwing a right hand of his own and got countered.

In Rahman 1 he turned up undertrained, with an arrogant attitude. I make no apologies for being a huge Lennox fan, but I will NEVER give him any kind of pass for that fight. For a guy who was so doggedly determined to fight for his " rights " with lawsuits and court injunctions, throughout his career you would have thought he would have had more respect for the sport, and the titles in particular.

 

nevertheless, it was ASAP, with McCall on the run in avoidance looking for what he tought were easy fights for most of that time.

 

The caveat was big fight. Rahman was a 20-1 underdog. That's no big fight, title or no title.

Sanders would be shorter.

 

Again, Lewis was a 20-1 underdog vs Rahman, who was seen to have no chance whatsoever. Unfortunately Lewis treated the fight as such.

This wasn't a big fight as seen by the odds, title or no title.

The McCall loss and the Rahman loss are poles apart. In one he was beaten on merit as he was incomplete and that was exposed. In the other it was apathy, c0ockiness and overconfidence.

 

Well considering Sanders had just been knocked out by Rahman I don't see how it could possibly be shorter.

And if Lewis under prepares for Sanders we'd likely see him lose.

 

Lewis was a FARRR greater fighter than either McCall or Rahman. Their should never have been a second bout with either. Against McCall he got cold ****ed. Lewis should have been much more cautious vs the hard right hand punch of McCall. Against Rachman he entered the ring unfocused and at least mentally unprepared and paid the price. Both return matches showed what a focused Lewis could do in the rind with inferior opposition. McCalls breakdown certainly did not help him but Lewis was not going to lose that night to a fighter of that level.

 

I agree. Lewis, rightly or wrongly, got caught up in the idea that he could potentially transition into the movie industry and was caught up in filming scenes for a movie. To use that as potentially being unfocused in a hypothetical h2h match is ludicrous.

 

I think he was just star struck and thought he could transition into becoming a movie star and briefly forgot he was a boxer. Had the fight been at sea level he still likely would have won.

 

Why ? many people here would make some of the ATGs or historical hWs a 10-1 or 20-1 undedog against Lewis too.
I mean, a lot of people say a Marciano or a Dempsey or even Frazier, Walcott or Jack Johnson, nevermind Braddock or Johansson, etc. would have "ZERO CHANCE" against Lennox Lewis. So, I guess he could be potentially unfocussed against any of them.

 

Beaten on merit in both fights.
Rahman trained hard. Lewis didn't bother.
Rahman won on merit.

And actually even more convincingly than McCall had, because Lewis was counted out.

 

Depends on the time, which was not mentioned. Put the version in that flogged Wlad and he'd be shorter than 20-1. We were talking "fantasy fights".

The odds of Lewis underpreparing across his career are about 50-1, so i'd take that chance. Prime he never underprepared, so no worries there with a prime version.

 

Lewis came back to prove the first fight against Rahman was a simple case of him coming in underprepared etc and the second showed this to be the case.

Lets say Lewis proved Rahman was not as good a fighter as himself. When in shape and focused (which he was in all but one or two bouts in his career and everytime around his peak) he was the far superior fighter.

As Perry said he never should have or needed to have lost to Rahman. I don't so much agree with McCall as Lewis has some technical flaws at the time and McCall and co. went right thru them. It was a learning experience for Lewis and he came out the other side a much greater fighter.

 

Why would the semi retired Sanders be shorter odds than the active Rahman coming off a Sanders victory? Victories Sprott or Tisdale?

Lewis has the attributes to beat anyone but we've seen how poor he is when he isn't focused.

 

Every all time great heavy weight has the potential to make the odd mistake in the odd fights but they have the chins to make up for it. Lenni didn't, period.

Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk