Lennox Lewis, Greatest Heavyweight of all time

You never tire of looking like a stupid ****, do you ?

Don't you cringe when you look in a mirror and see something that fcuk-witted looking out at you ?



I was commenting on your characterization of the Lewis defeats of Holyfield as CLOSE.

What the fcuk eles woud it be about, spaz-boy ?

The highlighting of the word 'close' would have given you a clue, IF you had a brain.

 

Look at this no life going crazy with insults because his reading comprehension failed him.:rofl

 

Just having a laugh at the village idiot, who makes a **** out of himself nearly every time he drops in.

And we can all see who has comprehension problems here, Dino boy.

 

I'd love to see your 14 ahead of him.

 

Hasim Rahman knocked out Corrie Sanders who knocked out Wlad in 2 rounds. Hasim at his best wasn't great but he was a good puncher.

Oliver McCall was a good fighter when he wasn't on drugs and had a great chin.

Joe Louis was knocked out by Max Schmelling a 190 pound fighter and hurt numerous times by lesser fighters yet he is always ranked in the to 3 heavyweights of all time but because Lewis was stopped he isn't a great fighter?

Lewis at his peak was great. Style wise the only fighter I would favor beating him without luck would be George Foreman. I could never imagine Ali beating him, Don't even mention 180 pound fighters like Dempsey, Tunney or Marciano, In fact don't mention guys like Jack Johnson either.

Lewis would have to be in the top 10 of all time. I wouldn't say anybody was number 1 just in the top 10 because there was no fighter in any weight class who didn't have some glaring weakness.

 

So can we clear this up?

Are you seriously suggesting getting one punch KO'd is far more embarrassing than getting a systematic beating for 10 rounds, then KTFO by a 42 - 1 underdog? Or even intentionally picking a soft choice opponent, ( 12 - 1 underdog ) and getting ANOTHER systematic beating and TKO' d in 11 rounds?

Before you answer I freely admit I do NOT know the odds on either McCall or Rahman at the time they first fought Lewis, but I do know the odds on Douglas / Tyson, and I actually backed Holyfield at 12 - 1 to beat Tyson, and made a nice few quid.

 

actually holyfield was a 25-1 underdog vs tyson in vegas in their first fight. i would never refer to holyfield as a "soft choice" but tyson was a big favorite. rahman was a 20-1 underdog in the first lewis fight. not sure on the mccall fight.

i'm not saying one way of losing is better than the other. in fact, they both suck. i'm saying that those losses stick out when you match lennox up H2H vs other great fighters all-time. lennox avenged both those losses big time which helps but i'm not sure he'd be favored in fantasy matchups vs the likes of holmes, foreman or prime tyson. before i get a scathing response, understand i think lennox is one of the greatest heavyweights ever. i just don't think there's a real argument for him being #1.

 

it depends on how you'd want to do your rankings. if you go H2H, he'd be pretty high imo. if you go on quality of wins, he'd rank a little lower. the heavyweight division has been contested for almost 300 years if you go back to bare knuckle days. the top 15 is hardly an insult to lennox.

 

I accept what you are trying to say. However my point is Lewis was NEVER outclassed, twice given a systematic beating then stopped whilst in his prime. Rather he was nailed by 2 very good punches.

The same simply can't be said for his contemporary from that era.

Please don't resurrect the old chestnut about the 23, and 29 year old respectively Tyson being shot. He wasn't, he just didn't have an answer to guys who really wanted to batter him.

As for Holyfield being considered a soft choice, that WAS indeed the case by the Tyson camp at that time. Holyfield was coming off a defeat to Bowe, a **** POOR showing against Bobby Czyz, amid rumours of him having medical problems with his heart. Hence Tyson paid Lewis 4 million step aside money and defended his recently acquired WBA belt against Evander.

 

point taken. lewis was clearly not in great shape vs rahman and he might have been able to continue vs mccall after the knockdown. he was hurt bad though. tyson wasn't shot but he wasn't training like he needed to be on the elite level.

lennox being an elite amateur puts him near the top of the heavyweight list as well.

 

Totally agree, but I have no sympathy for Lewis. If he was more impressed with hanging around with Brad Pitt, George Clooney, and Julia Roberts, than being fully prepared to fight in the altitude of South Africa, it is own stupid fvcking fault.

 

was just watching that movie last night and thought of that. i did get excited seeing him and wlad in the same ring. would have been a big fight. lewis would have been big favorite though.

 

Lewis was an extremely dangerous fighter because of his size, brain and power. To best him you needed a killer left jab with reach, an iron chin , great speed and stamina. Look how in 24 rounds he could not do much with a 37 year old Holyfield. Ali would have been too fast. Holmes as well. I also like a young Tyson, a young Holyfield and possibly Joe Louis. I don't really give many others that much of a shot. Just too big and too good.

 

i agree with what you're saying but in the first 12 rounds vs holyfield, lennox dominated. worst robbery i've ever seen because of the importance of the fight. very close second fight but i still thought lennox won.

 

On the original question

Yes. I would consider Lewis the probable favorite against any other heavyweight in a head to head match. In that sense, he is the greatest of all time.

*Historically, no. He is near the top, but I wouldn't rate him at the top.