Lennox Lewis championship run

I agree to a extent but there are reasons why some of the fights you listed either couldn't happen or circumstances stopped it happening or happening earlier. No one is without flaws in there resume or career you can easily poke these sort of holes in any fighter.

 

of course it is. I don't blame Lewis for not fighting these opponents, just as I don't blame Tim Whitearspoon for not doing so. but the facts remain the facts. Lewis faced the No. 1 in his category after a 10-year career and his opponents were clearly past prime. Maybe it was a coincidence but how do you explain that Holyfield was able to fight 2 fights with Moorer, 2 fights with Tyson, 3 fights with Bowe before Lewis fought him? That's why I think that the sentence: he didn't avoid anyone, he fought everyone, he cleared his entire era can be classified as an advertising slogan and not as a sports fact. He didn't avoid anyone and refused to fight the No. 1 contender 3 times. He didn't avoid anyone and for 8 years when he was in the top HW he didn't fight No. 1, he cleared his era where it actually cleared itself. The biggest fights of the '90s were fights where Lewis was in the audience, not in the ring.

 

Lewis was kind of a later bloomer than Holyfield as well as Mike Tyson tbf so they kinda had to fight when they did. You could say Holyfield was further past his prime when they did eventually fight due to some the wars earlier which I agree with.

Still he makes up for it by facing a great fighter late in career in Vitali and winning.

 

exactly. and that's why Lewis' run doesn't impress me much, not as much as people who didn't watch boxing back then. It looks great on Wikipedia, lots of great names but Lennox took them at a good time for himself and those fights weren't very good. Of course it doesn't change the fact that Lennox was a great sportsman and a very nice man with great personal class and great achievements.
Best regards.

 

To be honest I rate him lower than a lot this sub does in general I think. More so in H2H matches.

 

I guess the question is relative to who? Obviously he's not on par with Louis or Ali, but after that not many heavyweight greats who had nearly as much success or dominance as Lewis. Only people who can compare imo is Wlad and Holmes but I think Lewis has solid argument for being above both.

 

I'm not sure. Holmes has a better single win - his fights and wins over Norton and Cooney are better than Lewis' fights and wins over Holyfield and Tyson. He also has no embarrassing losses - he NEVER lost in his prime - and even in his past prime he didn't look as bad against the best Tyson or Holyfield as Lewis did against McCall. He also fought better opponents - while Lewis fought a 37 year old Holyfield, a 36 year old Tyson, a 35 year old Mercer Holmes fought a 22 year old Tyson, a 30 year old Holyfield, a 30 year old Mercer himself in his past prime.

Finally - he had a better record and more back-to-back defenses. How could Lewis be better than Holmes? He had less impressive wins, had worse losses, was less long-lived, had a worse record and fought weaker opponents.
But of course, it's still great but not as great as Holmes.

Wlad.. I have no opinion. He was probably just as great but he doesn't get the recognition.

 

I agree with your post but Lewis had very impressive wins against Ruddock and Golota.

 

I completely disagree with that take. Holmes has longevity, sure, but the idea that he fought better opponents or had better wins doesn't hold up. Norton was past his peak, and Cooney was never elite, he was a media-hyped contender with limited substance who gave Holmes more problems than he should’ve. Holmes barely edged Norton in a razor-close fight and had highly competitive bouts with Witherspoon and Carl Williams, both of whom Lewis would have likely dominated. Let’s not pretend Holmes didn’t show major vulnerability throughout his reign.

Meanwhile, Lewis clearly beat Holyfield twice—yes, an older Holyfield, but still a top-3 heavyweight at the time and a far better, more proven fighter than Cooney ever was. Tyson was faded, sure , but still a dangerous opponent who was on a 6 fight knockout streak. And more importantly, Lewis beat Vitali Klitschko, a future hall-of-famer and the best heavyweight of the next era. That win alone blows Cooney or Mercer out of the water in terms of historical significance. I would also say that Lewis beat much better contenders then Holmes. Tua, Rahman, Morrison, Briggs are way better then Weaver, Snipes, Shavers, Berdick.

As for losses—yes, Lewis got caught. He avenged both losses decisively. Holmes lost to Spinks, a blown-up light-heavyweight, and failed to avenge it in the rematch. That’s a worse mark on his record than either of Lewis's setbacks imo.

Holmes was consistent, no doubt. But consistency alone doesn’t outweigh superior opposition. Lewis ruled in a deeper, more dangerous era, unified titles, and cleaned out most of the division. Holmes had title defenses and a longer reign Lewis had the more quality wins by far.

 

Hmmm, even 42 year old Holmes beat 30 year old Ray Mercer more than prime Lewis beat 35 year old, inactive Mercer. Cooney is historically underrated but when he fought Holmes he was a beast. The second Lewis-Holyfield fight was very even, as even as Holyfield-Ruiz 10 months later. If Holy is Lewis's great success, then Ruiz is criminally having the most real success greater than Larry Holmes or the same.

I have huge doubts about Lewis beating Vitali. Lennox beat him so badly that the WBC ordered a rematch. Vitali himself has proven to be a very long-lived athlete but his prime was never more impressive than Cooney's. It's just that Vitali fought longer but not better. Holmes left no doubts beating Cooney, Lewis left just as many as he did with Mercer.

 

Holmes’ win over Mercer was def impressive, but styles make fights. Mercer was a fighter who struggled with boxers, and Holmes’ jab and experience were well-suited to handle him. That doesn’t necessarily mean Holmes was a better fighter than Lewis, just that he had a good style for Mercer and Mercer possibly overlooked Holmes.

Cooney did have power, but calling him a “beast” at the time is a bit of a stretch. His best win before Holmes was against an aging Norton, and he never proved himself as a truly elite contender. While he was a solid heavyweight, he never demonstrated a particularly high skill level, and after losing to Holmes, he never truly bounced back.

On the other hand, Vitali Klitschko was clearly the better fighter. He was far more skilled, much more consistent, and proved himself at a much higher level than Cooney ever did. Vitali dominated nearly every opponent he faced and remained a top heavyweight for years. Comparing him to Cooney doesn't hold up, Vitali was simply operating on a different level as a fighter.

Regarding Lewis vs. Holyfield, while the rematch was closer, Lewis still won convincingly across the two fights. Holyfield was a top heavyweight had a good streak before the fight and went on to beat Ruiz afterward so still a very good fighter when he fought Lewis.

As for Vitali, Lewis won the fight fair and square. While he was def down he was landing the harder shots and did enough damage to force a doctor stoppage. The WBC ordering a rematch doesn’t mean the first fight was illegitimate, just that Vitali was a top contender and proves himself to be a fighter on par with Lewis. But Lewis had already cemented his legacy and chose to retire on top, having beaten the next dominant fighter of the era. While a rematch would have been nice I think it was unnecessary for Lewis.

 

I usually flip between Holmes Lewis and Wlad for my number 3-5 spots on my list personally.

 

I think those are all solid and can see any argument for either one depending on what you value.

 

Holyfield didn't really win against Ruiz 10 months after the Lewis fight. They were almost the same fights.. almost the same. Ruiz had the same success as Lewis's greatest success. Similar levels.

I don't really understand how Lewis' style could suit Mercer, Holmes' style didn't. Mercer at that time was unable to win convincingly against Ferguson. He was overweight, had a drinking problem, was inactive. If Mercer was really Lennox's kryptonite, then he is another name that Lewis simply waited out by fighting him in 1996 and not, for example, in 1992. Also, the Holyfield fight in 1992 is not the same as the Holy fight in 1999.

Just like the Tyson fight in 1988 is not the same as the Tyson fight in 2002.

You underestimate Cooney. Orders, future and past achievements do not fight wars. Vitali was more professional than Cooney but in their prime they were absolutely equally effective fighters. The difference is that Cooney was dominated by Holmes and Klitschko by a doctor.
I value Lewis, I value Holmes much more. And honestly, Vitali