Lennox Lewis in Today's Heavyweight Division

At what point did I suggest it wasn't valid to reference Lewis/Rahman? I didn't.

Was I responding to a poster, who had previously referenced all 44 of Lewis' bouts and formed a balanced argument, based on an entire career? No.

Referencing the Lewis/Rahman bout is fine. Is it alone a valid measure of how Lewis would fare in today's division? I very much doubt it.


As I have alluded to several times before, in other posts - When discussing speculative scenarios, we deal in what we consider to be likelihoods.


Using all 44 of Lewis' bouts then, what is the likelihood of Lewis turning up in the kind of condition that he did for Rahman, compared with him being reasonably prepared, as he was for his other fights?

What are the odds he fights a title fight in Johannesburg, in today's division?

What are the odds he gets contracted to play a cameo in a reboot of Oceans 11, as a title fight approaches?

What are the odds he hasn't retired by 35, having cleaned out today's division, with there being fewer barriers, as there were in the '90s, in the way of him getting to the highest ranked guys earlier?


Once you've worked that out, try and gauge the likelihood of his 'vulnerabilities', a) surfacing and, b) being capitalized upon, against and by the top guys of today's division.


The above are just examples of confounding variables you cannot possibly accommodate, with any degree of certainty, in an entirely speculative scenario. However, I'll be really impressed if you can map an entire 44-fight career, from 1989 to 2003, onto an imaginary career, fought at some point in today's division, and there be any sense to be made out of it.

 

It seems much sillier to pretend that this possibility has not been considered by those who think it unlikely.

It's a speculative question by the OP, which is receiving speculative responses - making it all pretty much 'pretend'.

What are you talking about? Most posters I read and people I talk to about Lewis are well aware of how close the Lewis/Mercer fight looked, but Lewis won. Lewis also won the second fight with Holyfield, despite him being comparatively lackluster in their rematch. I've found few who would dispute the idea of it having been closer than the first fight, in which Lewis thrashed Holyfield, while the scoring was universally condemned.

I'm not sure what revisionism you're referring to.

Anything is possible. What is more probable?

Again - what is the likelihood of Lewis losing against today's top-5 heavyweights, given his record and the context of the actual bouts in his career?

That's a big statement and, even if you could provide some supporting evidence for it, I'd still be left wondering what it means in real terms, in relation to a probability of outcomes.

 

Given his actual losses and close to calls with guys like Mercer and a faded Holyfield I think the reasonable conclusion is that if he is around today he at the very least suffers a few losses. Why is it probable he goes undefeated today when he couldn't do that in his own time?

 

Is he really favor Hasim Rahman and Oliver McCall over the current crop?

 

Yes - I know what I wrote, what it was in response to and the context in which the post in question was made. You don't appear to comprehend the context or are deliberately trying to make it something it was not, using your typical tools of choice: 'literalism' and 'pedantry'.

I didn't suggest that it was not valid to reference Lewis/Rahman.

Anyone can invent a brief, broad-brush narrative for a speculative scenario, which includes undefined "specifics".

 

one loss, due to lack of commitment for sure. probably to aj. others cant see him losing.

perhaps you cant get over klitchko getting easily killed by nobodies repeatedly.

 

There are several approaches to this speculation that one needs to take, in order to consider it likely that Lewis loses in this today's division. For example:

- Loading excessive and general negativity on a handful of Lewis' performances.

- Ignoring the fact that Lewis defeated every man he ever faced.

- Ignoring the fact that Lewis never lost a decision.

- Relying on the possibility of a KO/Stoppage; a possibility applicable to every boxer in history.

- Ignoring that the current crop of heavyweights is relatively unproven, with each of the top 5 having exhibited their weaknesses of their own, in what is still a relatively shallow division.

- Ignoring the possibility that Lewis might well have had a shorter career, with virtually no one else to fight after he'd faced the current top-10 (unless someone can point to the swathe of talent ready to rapidly replace the current leaders).

 

This is reasonable. Lewis had a long career. If Lewis had 15 title defenses from the point where Wlad lost to Fury, to the year 2025 he's going to lose one or two. Could be to Joshua, Wilder's puncher's chance, Fury's spoiling tactics, or just some big guy who can hit that catches him.

While I do think Lewis fought in a better time in comparison to what is out there today, he's not bulletproof. His two one punch KO's show that. Neither Rhaman or McCall would be #1 today. This timeline is full of big men who can hit

 

Wilder is currently 40-0-1. Even Valuev went 46-0.

I've not tried to argue that Lewis goes undefeated because, granted, on the balance of boxing's history, one would have to consider a heavyweight going undefeated, over the course of a career, as unlikely - But, then again, it doesn't seem to be that difficult to string lengthy winning streaks together, either - with the right level of opposition, these days.

So, to my mind, a specualtion hinges on three things... ...does Lewis get the raw end of a referee's or judges' decision; shoot himself in the foot, against opponents he should really beat; or, are the current crop of top heavyweights in play, at this time, enough to stop him?

My own view is that a reliance on the first two possibilities is not far removed from pursuing the 'law of averages'. Not impossible, but not aligned with Lewis' capabilities and his predominant run of form; therefore, being more a case of waiting for an exception that does not increase in likelihood, over time or through increments in his number of fights.


On the last question, I have already put forward my theory on the outcome of matches involving the top-4 (assuming these are still considered to be Fury, Joshua, Wilder and Ortiz).

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...vyweight-division.622764/page-3#post-19632654


With the above in mind, these brief summaries do not attempt to calculate or consider the effect of external factors (for reasons already given) and look more at a few of the capabilities so far displayed and factors in play. Suffices to say that since Fury, Joshua, Wilder and Ortiz are the best available opposition, that I think an 'in-tune' Lewis turns up to these fights and wins. This also has something to do with my view of these current, top-four heavyweights not being, in any comparative sense, at a level that we know Lewis was able to attain. This view could change, but I'll need to wait and see if anything happens to provide reason for it to do so.

On that basis and at the moment, I'd suggest that, bar any mishaps, Lewis dominates today's division. He also probably retires a lot earlier, having cleaned it out quite rapidly, with not enough competitive challenges coming through the heavyweight ranks to keep him busy.

 

Not even a discussion Lewis would dominate this lot for years

 

Lewis won gold in the 1988 Olympics then turned pro in 2013. He didn't step up in competition until late 1992 when he faced Ruddock.

Given his actual career trajectory we could assume that if he goes to the 2012 olympics and turns pro in 2013 he doesn't step up in competition until late 2016

 

Lewis beat ranked Gary Mason in March 91.

 

Oooooooops.

 

Ortiz was in his 40s during Lewis reign and no one even heard of him. And now when he's in his 60s he's a top fighter and Wilders best win.

 

Mason never beat anyone who proved themselves world-class. You can believe he was a top 10 heavyweight I suppose but there is very little evidence to back up such a claim.

Following the fight he faced Weaver, Biggs, McCrory, Billups, etc none of whom were highly ranked.

It's only after the Ruddock fight in 1992 that he starts consistently facing elite opponents.