If JHL is rated in the top 4 LHs, he'd have to rate higher than Loughran, Tunney and Greb. This doesn't make sense to me. Can any JHL advocates enlighten me as to his superiority over these three? I also have Charles, Moore, Spinks, Foster, Bivins, and Tommy Gibbons above him and Sam Langford if you consider him as an LH.
I agree, I would rate all the fighters you listed over Lewis. I'd also add Billy Conn and Harold Johnson to that list as well. While Lewis had a commendable run of wins during his championship tenure, I don't think it was any more impressive than the runs these fighters and others put together in their careers. I can't put him in a top 10 myself for the simple fact that I can find at least 10 fighters (and more, in fact) that clearly deserve to be rated over him IMO.
In that footage of him sparring he looks a nice tidy boxer. He showed a classy jab with good combinations flowing off of it. Also his counter punching ability looked top notch.
It is indeed. Funny that no one seems to ever mention Al Gainer when discussing Lewis's most impressive wins. Gainer was a left-hooking KO artist with an iron chin who probably would have been champ if Lewis had not been around. Like Lewis he beat many top heavyweights in addition to the men his size. After stopping Tony Galento on the Louis-Schmeling undercard Mike Jacobs called him This content is protected was actually once considering him for a shot at Joe Louis, if that tells you anything. He also beat Jim Braddock and Tiger Jack Fox. John Henry Lewis beat him twice.
Media Darlings and ongoing Press ALWAYS gets some fighters the 'memory stick', whether they were actually the best or NOT. John Henry Lewis was one of the Greats and AMONG the Best of Alltime fighters for sure...