Is Lennox Lewis Overrated?

I think h2h he could give anyone a go, career wise I think he did the best he could given the circumstances. A Bowe fight would have been nice, as would a prime Tyson fight, but they just we're in the cards. So a Lewis victory over Bowe in the olympics and a victory over past prime Tyson are all we have. But notice the word victory. I think the victory against Bowe allowed Bowe to know what he was up against, and he didn't want any part of it. As for Tyson, I think Lewis fought the perfect strategy. Some say Tyson won the first round, but it was Lewis who had Tyson hurt, using uppercuts and manhandlinig him, I think this strategy and excellent use of his size, would have given any version of Tyson trouble.

Rating him top 3-10 isn't unreasonable given that it's so damn hard to rate fighters who've never fought each other.

Funny I watch Foreman and I think he's invincible, especially if he were to pace himself a little better, then I watch Johnson easly beat Jeffries, and wonder who could beat him, I watch a prime Dempsey against Willard and I wonder the same thing. The same applies to Ali, Louis, Holmes, and yes Lewis.

Careerwise, his career is as good as any. Maybe Ali, a Louis had better careers but it depends on how you rate the comp. I certainly think Lewis fought harder punchers than Louis did. Ali, hard to say. Probably over all yes, but Ali's top 2-3 are better than anyone Lewis fought.

So he's in an elite category, the only question is where, and it could vary depending on whether you're ranking him h2h or career achievements, or a combination of both.

 

I honestly don't see too many people rating him too high to begin with.

 

Good summary of his career. I wouldn't put young Foreman ahead of him since his resume is a bit thin, but everyone his own opinion.

 

A poll on this forum a while back showed that something like 80% of the members had him in the top 10, and about half had him in the top 5. How, then, could he be vastly underrated? Do you think he should be consensus #1?

You really think the late '90s through early 2000s is the best era ever?! Better than the '70s?

I would consider Holyfield's win over Bowe, who was undefeated champion at his peak, substantially better than his win over a past-prime, jail-rotted Tyson. Moreover, three years is quite a while in boxing time. Ali lost to Leon Spinks just over three years after what was probably his career best win over Foreman.

While this is a strong resume, certainly you're going over the top in bolstering some of these fighters' standings; Tua was most definitely not a "new Tyson," and it's difficult to call Gary Mason a "top five fighter" when the highlights of his resume are a washed-up Quick Tillis and damaged-goods Tyrell Biggs.

Holyfield did not duck Lewis.

 

never in a million years is lennox overated, top 4 atg

 

At this point Janitor wades in with the historical perspective.

Lewis is absolutely in the same class as historic greats like Sullivan, Jeffries, Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano and Ali in terms of resume.

You have seven title defences and I am prety sure all of them were ranked.

You have a dozen wins over oponents curently ranked in the top 10.

He beat everybody he ever faced.

He is not by any means the only all time great to get starched by lesser fighters.

The curent beltholders are pygmies by comparison.

I was sceptical for a while but I came round.

 

Excellent stuff.

 

In my opinion, I think Lennox Lewis was good but I can´t rate him top 5, I´m not sure about top 10. Somewhere between 10-12. The 70´s had great fighters and there has been so many during the years. To believe that he could beat a prime Ali/Clay or Frazier, Foreman, Holmes,Marciano, Louis, Walcott, Tyson, Liston is to overrate him. Perhaps he is nr 10 or perhaps I forgot someone on my list.
But in my opinion he would never beat these guys in their prime.
All the best
The Predator

 

Why couldn't he beat any of them

He only lost twice, one time he was ready to continue vs McCall and once truly stopped when he was in horrible condition and basicly taking the ****.

Both losess avenged, he never got out pointed, Id like to see how maeciano, walcott, louis, liston, frazier and even foreman would deal with such a big and skilled box puncher.

Seriously can you imagine marciano walking onto a lewis upper cut :bbb or even smoking joe (remember what foreman did) Lewis hits almost as hard but is the far superiour boxer.

I rate Lewis 4 all time behind Ali-Louis-Holmes :good

 

People who have Lewis at three and above are perhaps pushing it. He is certainly a top ten fighter without question. I'd have Lewis at the midway point - anywhere around there is a reasonable standing for Lewis.

For those interested, here is a small clip of Lewis sparring and training with Steward. Only now that Lewis has gone do a lot of people appreciate just how good he was.

[yt]MHRMQ8bG6uI[/yt]

 

The notion that Ruddock was somehow "ruined" going into his fight with Lewis is one of the worst pieces of revisionist history I've ever seen.

Ruddock was just hitting his peak when he fought Lewis. In his performances since Tyson, he was looking and performing at his best ever, and was being held in the highest regard he ever was. Some people even rated him better than Bowe at this time, or at least on par with him. Hell, he was a pretty sizeable favorite to beat Lewis too, on Lewis' home turf.

Ruddock was no more "ruined" at this time than Lewis was.

 

Rudduck said himself he was never the same after the 2 Tyson fights. And you can cearly so for yourself he wasn't.

 

I remember Lennox when he attended the 1984 Canadian Olympic team
boxing training site in Burnaby, BC. I though he was the best
Canadian boxer. He didn't win a medal in 1984, but he sure did in 1988,
and the rest is history.

Regardless of how folks rank him, he is a class act.
He should be considered a Canadian and English sports hero.

 

I don't recall Ruddock saying at any time before the Lewis fight, "Man, those Tyson fights took a lot out of me. I'm ruined. I'll probably be KO'd in 2 sometime soon". I don't doubt he might've come up with that excuse years later, but it's not uncommon for fighters to do that.

And sorry, I don't "cleary see" where Ruddock was less than his best any time prior to the Lewis fight. Sure, he wasn't quite the same after the Lewis fight, but then it's Lewis that should get credit for ruining him, not Tyson.

 

If he's inside most people's top 5, I'd say he's being overrated a bit. For me, anywhere from 6-10 is perfectly acceptable.

Lewis doesn't crack my top 5 for two reasons:

1)He dominated only a relatively small part of his era. From '92 to '98, either Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson or Lewis was the world's best heavyweight. Take your pick. Few from that period were calling Lewis that though, to be honest.
From '99 to his retirement he was the best, and pretty much universally regarded as such.

The fact that he beat two of the three rival claimants doesn't change the facts that who was the world's best heavyweight at that point (92-98 ) was very much uncertain.
In addition, although he easily beat Holyfield the first time round, I thought the plan to rematch them actually backfired on Lewis as in my mind Holyfield won the second fight. At the end of the second fight, I was not at all convinced Lewis was the better fighter.

2) He should have given Vitali a rematch. There were very good grounds for a rematch, yet Lewis retired. A Louis, an Ali - they would have given that rematch.
To be honest, I've always felt Lewis kind of ducked Vitali by promplty retiring. He won fair and sqaure, but there were good, valid grounds for a rematch.

Certainly, he was most eager in unashamedly trying to force Tyson to fight him in a rematch, in a fight nobody thought Tyson would win. It's a pity he didn't persue a rematch with Vitali with the same determination.