Larry Holmes v. Lennox Lewis's opponents?

Lewis stepped up to world level in 1992, taking the Ruddock fight, and fought elite competition all the way up to 2003, finishing his career by fighting a prime Vitali Klitschko.

Holmes didn't really do much before Shavers, so it's hard to make a case for him beating elite fighters at 25. Realistically speaking, we'd have to take the 28 year old Larry of the first Shavers fight as the version that would be fighting Ruddock in his first step-up. Assuming Larry then followed the same career trajectory Lewis did, he'd be 39 by the time he fought Vitali! And he was already badly faded and lethargic at 35!!

Don't think Larry had the longetivity to sweep his resume.

 

I disagree.
Holmes might well finish Morrison quicker than Lewis did. Lewis seemed to be practicing new technique in that fight.
Bentt blew Morrison out in 1 round. Mercer blew Morrison out in 5.
A 30-year-old Holmes would make easy work of Morrison, between 3 and 7 rounds somewhere.

Holmes would easily handle Rahman. That would be easier than David Bey. Lewis got hit by Rahman, I'd say.

Botha would barely land a glove, doesn't matter how long it lasts. Could be 5 rounds, could go 12, doesn't matter.

These are easier fights than Bonecrusher Smith or Carl Williams. These are easy slow opponents. Plodding opponents.

No, he wouldn't have lost early in his career to some drug-addled Tucker. Not in the slightest.
Lewis's resume just doesn't present any serious difficulty, especially early on, and even if it did, Holmes managed to win the tough challenge from Weaver and scares against Shavers, so he's not going to lose to a Phil Jackson or a Henry Akinwande. He'd thrash them. They weren't even as good as Berbick and Snipes and Witherspoon.

less struggles, that's what I see.

 

Well, this looks like Holmes is getting penalized for fighting a busier schedule.
Holmes didn't need 14 years to go 44 fights, he was on 44-0 in his 10th year.

Also, he got injured in 1976 when he was scheduled to face a top contender, I think Foreman.
The Holmes on film who beat Roy Williams in 1976 would have schooled Ruddock.
In my opinion.

 

I think Holmewas gets by .some of the fighters lewis destroyed like grant would go longer with Holmes without being a great risk .Holmes chin was more reliable than Lewis so I think if he got knocked over he would Perhaps get up and win

 

Well, it's debatable whether Holmes could have maintained a 3-4 fight per year schedule against Lewis' opposition.

Point taken on the latter half of the argument, though.

 

Holmes doesn't get one bombed. But maybe drops a decision you wouldn't expect him to do.

Hard to pick someone to favour over him though, maybe Vitali beats the old man.

 

I'm a pretty big Holmes fan, but I certainly don't see him beating Vitali at 37. One would think he would win the rest, but one thing to consider is that fighters, contrary to popular belief, do have bad nights. If he had a could bad nights he could loose. But I guess he'd be favoured over most of these guys. Holmes, Holyfield would always be a good fight.

 

Lewis's era was much tougher than Holmses..Holmses biggest threats were Renaldo Snipes and Very ****ey..

Lewis was facing guys like Ray Mercer, David Tua, Tommy Morrison, Razor Rudock, Mike Grant...
Plus Lewis is a 2 time champ who beat everyone he faced

 

Good posts. I tend to agree that Lewis' power made fights that would likely have been tough for Holmes, easy for him ... and that Holmes superior boxing would have had him doing better against bruisers like Mercer than Lewis.

Overall Lewis' resume is a bit better than Holmes. Lewis could, and often did, fall back on his size and power to pull his fat from the fire in a tough matchup, whereas Holmes had nowhere near the blasting power Lennox had. Some walkovers that Lewis had might prove to be surprisingly tough for Holmes. It's actually quite an interesting question. I think Larry would do worse than Lewis, but I am not a great Holmes fan, so take that with a pinch of salt