Lennox Lewis InThis Month's Ring

So - an agreement, that Lewis would fight Ruiz in July 2000, wasn't enough? Suggesting that King was doing what everyone else would have done is highly speculative.

A strong case? Only by virtue of the commercials having been so poor; a clause, which didn't achieve what Lewis' lawyers had expected it to and a legal complaint that looked like it had been put together on the back of someone else's shopping list, from a fortnight ago.

Most court rulings are logical; but logical is not necessarily practical and doesn't even mean an outcome is automatically correct. I do not really see the court ruling as any type of vindication of King.

Newman and Bowe treated the Heavyweight Championship like rubbish.

Lewis no doubt had to step aside for both Holyfield and Tyson at different times. He was paid for the Tyson step aside and probably for Holyfield too. But, is that the point?

King was calling the shots with both Tyson and Holyfield in the mid-90s and neither of those guys were showing a lot of genuine enthusiasm for the task of cutting Lewis down to size. King certainly wasn't and it makes me chuckle a little that you bring up the McCall rematch for the vacant WBC title, as though it were some kind of favor. Who do you think set that up - and - more to the point - why did they set that up?

Answer: Don King, who had Tyson vacate his WBC strap because he daren't let him face Lewis.


Who doesn't complain about King and how many times has King been sued by one of his boxers? King caused Lewis immense frustration. It was probably wise of Lennox to keep someone like King in his sights and not on his blind side.

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion.

John Ruiz was suggested as a career "miss" by Lewis. I disagree with this for the reasons given - and, as it happens, Lewis did offer Ruiz a fight (as is evidenced by the agreement with the WBA to sanction Lewis/Grant). That doesn't need 'buy-in' to a Party Line.

You started out by categorically stating that "Don King won the case because the WBA (and Lewis) were in the wrong".

I think my response to this statement explored the matter, in much greater detail and I have kept to the facts as closely as possible, based on the available case notes. Facts are facts. How we interpret them will vary but, please... ...'I clearly buy into a Party Line'? Definitely not.

I don't doubt Lewis ended up playing the game like the rest of them. He had to; not only to get his chances but to keep the belts, once he'd taken them. However, the insinuation that he had always had some kind of upper-hand and privilege is quite off the mark. Only on becoming the unified Champion, was Lewis really in the driving seat.

In my opinion, he'd earned that position.

In the beginning, Lewis - an Olympic Super Heavyweight Gold Medal Winner - found himself in a bit of a promotional wasteland, with very limited options and no financial backing. The decision to go with Maloney, who was barely a promoter, at that time, meant they more or less built everything from the ground up.

Remember Roger Levitt - Lewis' initial financial backer. That went well, didn't it?

As alluded to in previous posts (as well as this one) his team were often a shambolic rabble and I wouldn't use his legal advisors for anything critical. Well-connected, as he might of become, it took several years to develop that.

 

You are saying "no doubt" and "probably" in the same sentence. And you still pretend you words to be taken seriously?

And tell me, when Holyfield could have paid Lewis to step aside? WHEN? What year, what fight?

In fact, Holyfield was willing to pay step aside money for his mandatory challenger Michael Moorer to make a unification fight with Lewis early in 1994.

"The long wait for Bowe versus Lewis was over. Now it was Holyfield versus Lewis. An agreement for that was cautiously in place before Saturday's contest but nothing had been signed. It can only happen if Michael Moorer, the leading IBF and WBA challenger, is prepared to step aside."

Source - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...ice-for-his-slothful-preparation-1502827.html

 

Now you're just not making sense. You have referred to two sentences. I used the phrase "no doubt" in the first sentence and the word "probably" in the second sentence. Do you understand?

I do not doubt that promises were made to fight Lewis, by both Tyson and Holyfield (via Don King), with Lewis being asked to wait in the meantime, and the fights subsequently failing to materialize. Whereas, we know some sort of financial deal was worked out between Don King and the Lewis camp, in respect to his rightful turn at matching Tyson for the WBC title (and that Tyson vacated the title, as well, rather than face Lewis), I am not certain Lewis was compensated for delays created by Don King, in respect to a Lewis/Holyfield match-up.

I suspect so. Hence, my use of the word "probably". But, even then, I wouldn't bet on it.

Incidentally, the article you posted doesn't mention money being offered to Moorer to step-aside. Nevertheless, it's interesting to me that the intentions expressed in '93 would take another 5 years or so to become manifest as an actual fight.