If Lennox Lewis had these fights in the early 90s would he have won both of these fights? Lewis back in the early 90s when he knocked Ruddock out called out Holyfield! And said that he'd face Tyson aswell in the early 90s. Its not fair really as he regards himself as the best but he faced a washed up 1999 Holyfield and a shot 2002 Tyson, but if he did what he said he was going to do and the politics has gone well do you lot think Lennox Lewis would be were he is now. This content is protected This content is protected
Holyfield would have whooped Lewis up. This is based on the fact that a prime Lennox Lewis was pushed to the brink by a washed up Holyfield in their rematch in late 1999. I think Lewis did enough to win the decision, but Holyfield barely gave him time to breathe. I think Lewis would have lost to Tyson if they fought in the 80s or 90s because Lewis didn't peak until around 1997-2002. If Tyson fights any other version of Lewis, he'd knock him out. So, in a sense, Lewis' legacy is somewhat mixed.
I'd go with Lewis over both. Lennox was considerably lighter and threw lots more lefthooks back then & changed that style later on. Holyfield would be the sterner test but Evander was outboxed by Bowe and Moorer in that timeframe and alweways had troubles with jabbers. He was badly outjabbed by Lewis in their first bout and the judging was so poor it was the only reason he ever got a rematch. If that bout was scored differently, there is no rematch for Evander. Tyson is the type that is going to go downhill about 25% whenever he lost his first fight. It happened to be a Douglas that did it & a youthful Lewis is a more formidable opponent than Douglas ever was. And after that Douglas bout, it sure wasn't the same Tyson anymore and he'd need all of his toolset for a Lennox Lewis.
A prime Holyfield was beaten badyl by a small Micheal Moorer and pushed to the brink by Bobby Chyz and an ancient Larry Holmes. Holyfield was a great warrior and overachiever, H2H he is overrated.
Come on. One could say as well that Lewis was KO'd by McCall and Rahman, should've drawn with Mercer, was lucky against Bruno, and was in trouble vs Briggs as well. I believe Holy could win based mostly on their rematch, when he was definitely past prime and Lewis more or less in his prime - and Holy still almost won. If Holy fights smart (and does not have hepatisis, heart problems, etc ;-) ) I have a feeling he would decision LL.
Totally agree. There's a reason Bowe ducked the younger Lewis, he was much more dynamic, if a little less sturdy then when he was older.
Why would one consider only one of those fights to determine a particular outcome? Basically in most people's minds Lewis won the fight fight by about 10-2, maybe 9-3. The second fight most scored it 8-4, some 7-5. Taken together that means out of 24 rounds most think Lewis won between 18-16 of them. That may be close, but Lewis still clearly won the two fights.
Ugh, garbage. Holyfield's steroid abuse was catching up to him during the fights you're referencing, he was literally having heart related complications in the ring during the Moorer fight. You could see the man going bald from said steroid abuse during that time frame as well. The sole reason Holyfield's still hanging around is due to him learning to box as opposed to fight. He's said himself that he's become moresubtle and refined in many ways as he's gotten older, while he was still trying to do what he always did against Moorer and co. Going all pressure when your health and heart are failing isn't a particularly good idea. Really, look at his work from mid 94' to late 99'. Some of his worst performances ever. The Mercer fight was a near draw with Holy being gassed in a 10 round fight, he looked terrible against Czyz, he was stopped by Bowe, beaten by Moorer. And the Tyson fight was Holyfield's long time ambition, his mount everest. But most everything else around that time when his health was slowly going to ****... Eh.
Lennox beat both of them decisively once they finally agreed to fight him, at a time when all of them (including Lewis) were aging veterans. That settles the matter as far as I'm concerned.
Losing a very questionable split decision is not "beaten badly". Beating the **** out of another guy for five rounds until he quits on his stool is not "being pushed to the brink".
Lennox Lewis could have achieved greatness even earlier if he had been given the chance in 1993 against Riddck Bowe OR in 1996 when he won a court case to fight Mike Tyson for the WBC title but instead accepted stand aside money because Lewis was unsure about taking the fight at that moment. Holyfield after beating Tyson twice only faces Lewis two years later - then Lewis is robbed of victory - then Lewis is finally recognised as the best heavyweight champion late in 1999 - at 33 years old. Lewis was probably the greatest heavyweight of the 1990s but the fact that he wasn't American didn't help ( as he would not generate as much interest or money) Also champions Bowe, Holyfield, Moorer, Foreman and Tyson did not give Lewis his shot from 92-99 which just delayed the opportunity that Lewis deserved as soon as he KOd Ruddock in 1992. Also the Oliver Mccall defeat set back Lewis's career by about 5 years.
I don't see much separation between early 90s pre-prime Lewis and some of the lost generation 80s heavies, to be honest (I mean that as a knock on him and a compliment to them). Physical force, but it seemed like he was still learning how to use his size (strange considering his amateur pedigree).
