Lennox Lewis. Does he have some holes in his legacy?

I have to respectfully disagree that Evander was anywhere near prime agains Lewis.. He was even further past it to the point of being shot against Byrd. Holy's prime in my eyes was probably 1989 to maybe 1993. And beating Tyson was no indication of prime as Tyson was past it himself, not to mention a year and half prior to the Lewis fights.

 

Yeah, I think t's quite clear that Holyfield's last prime performance was the rematch against Bowe. It's actually few cases where I think it's as easy to see where a fighter's prime ended.

 

Agreed,

By the time Evander met Lewis for the first time in March of 1999, he was already 36 years of age and had fought only once in the previous 16 months against the mediocre Vaugn Bean. This doesn't even factor the wear and tear from the harsh wars he had already accumulated, on and off periods of inactivity and various bouts with health issues.. He was at the point where most men would have called it quits.. Heart and devotion to training were the only things keeping him going... That and substantial financial loss due to numerous marriages and poor money management.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

Lewis & King. You would have more chance of the Queen of England and Charles Manson working together than those 2.

There is only one bum on this thread, and you're it, if your stupid enough to believe that.

 

That is more revisionist garbage by asser. Neither Holyfield nor Lewis held any belts, and by extension any bargaining power in 96. Tyson did.

The reason he chose to fight Hoyfield and pay step aside to Lewis was because Holy allegedly had heart problems, and he had looked sh it in the Czyz fight.

 

Well, he wasn't even prime for those fights.

Also, he didn't exactly look "near prime" against John Ruiz, did he ? Just nine and sixteen months past his fight with Lewis. How far was he past his prime ?
I'm guessing we can both agree he struggled with Ruiz - even getting knocked down (something LL couldn't manage).

And that was just a few months after he won against Rahman. Sure, there was a terrible headbutt, but I think he looked at least equal with Rahman (who had just gone 1-1 with Lewis).
Yes, DEFINITELY WAY PAST HIS BEST against Byrd.

But I almost see a pattern emerging.

Ruiz seemed to do pretty well against Holyfield, who actually gave LL his closest fight.
Byrd beat Holyfield just after Holyfield beat Rahman who was 1-1 with LL ..

.... yet somehow Byrd and Ruiz are deemed "not good enough" to face LL.

Why a travesty ?
Even if you score it a clear loss for Holyfield, doesn't he deserve the rematch ?

Lennox got an immediate rematch with Rahman, when he didn't even go 5 rounds with him.

I see a lot of double-standards when it comes to LL.

 

Except they did work together several times.
And Lewis's management continually went the WBC route knowing it meant getting in bed with Don King.



P.S. Nothing would surprise me about the British Royal family.

 

Which of the Holyfield fights did Lewis lose?:huh

When was Ibeabuchi ranked during Lewis's title reign?
Tua had no leg injury it was a ticker problem.

 

Byrd was 33, only a year older than Lewis was when he KO'ed Golota.

Goosen claimed Tua sustained a rib injury 2 months prior in sparring and Lewis re-injured Tua in the 2nd round. I doubt it had any effect on the result as Lewis was in total control from the first second to the last second of the fight.

Lewis should be 2-0 vs Evander. He clearly won the first fight by a huge margin, one of the worst decisions in boxing history. How Eugenie Williams gave Holyfied the 5th when Lewis battered Holyfield in that round, I will never know.

 

No one who saw that first Holy-Lewis fight felt that it should have been a draw, except for those who actually judged it..

 

I guess it boils down to your definition of 'near.'

My original post was in response to a comparison of LL and Byrd based on comparisons of their records against common oponents, and Byrd's win over Holy appeared to get rated on a par with Lenox's.

My point was that the calibre of Holy faced was significantly different.

I'm not sure it was as much a case of 'not good enough' as it was a case of 'no great public interest. In the early part of a career, this would hardly be much of a defence for Lennox, but as he was winding down toward the rocking chair, with a limited number of fights left, the world was not clamouring for LL/Byrd or LL/Ruiz bouts.

Tyson and Vitali made more sense.

Frankly, no.

Evander did nothing in the first fight to suggest a rematch was warranted. The ONLY reason it was granted was the travesty of the decision. The rematch was to set the record straight, so to speak.

In similar fashion to the more recently contested Pac-Timmy bouts. The only reason for that bout was another travesty. (Coincidently, Lennox remarked that Pac/Bradley (1) was the most egregious decision since his own 'draw' with Evander.)

A single unexpected (lucky ?) punch when Lennox was winning is a little different than the trouncing Evander took in the first encounter.

 

Lewis 1-1 vs Holyfield?

Really ?

 

All those guys wanted no part of Lennox .. I don't ever remember Lennox ducking anyone .. he was supremely confident in his own abilities .. I do wish he fought a prime Bowe .. that might have been a hell of a fight if the Bowe that fought Holyfield the first time showed uo ..