Lennox Lewis is overrated

Yes it's funny how that little fact has been lost over the years isn't it? It's a damn shame that Holyfield lost that first fight with Bowe otherwise he'd have HAD to face Lewis back in the day, and Zakman wouldn't be able to spout his **** about primes :yep

Where is Rock Newman these days anyway? Suffering from something painful and terminal, I hope.

 

It's also a fact stuffed away in the "lets pretend it didn't happen" file, that Holyfields advisors preferred a fight against Bowe than Ruddock (who was Holy mandatory - not Bowe). They believed Ruddock would be tougher to beat because of the way he fought Tyson.


This was supposed to lead to a Holy - Ruddock finale (both guys were favourites), leading to mega bucks, and a good risk/reward fight.

 

Ah so what you're saying is that even if Holy had won the first fight with Bowe he'd have played the ***** card and dumped the WBC in the trash can then?

Lennox never lost a fight EVER that he was motivated for, I guess Evander and Riddick both knew that back in the day - Tyson certainly did :deal

 

he'll simply come back with the "prime" rhetoric

 

No, I'm not saying that, I couldn't stand the heat from Zak

I'm saying IF Holy had beaten Bowe - then facing Lewis would have been a shock.

It's always my contention that Holys advisors steered him away from true power merchants (with the exception of Tyson when everyone considered Holy done). Holy had the ability to outbox most of them, but chose not to. Ends up being dangerous.

I know there will be counter arguments, but that's my honest belief.

I believe Holys team thought Ruddock to be the more dangerous of the 3 fighters.

 

:hey That funny ? VLAD has never lost a fight he was motivated for either !:deal

 

He can't be overreted.

He's one of the two best heavyweights since Ali and one of the four best ever.

 

I would agree with this more or less.

 

Almost everyone did, including veterans like Holmes and Foreman.

There was that article the...think it was the NY Times did where they asked a lot of well-known boxing stars about who the next big champ was going to be. And by a landslide, their pick was Ruddock. Bowe and Lewis got about 1 vote each, Holy had none...I should try to track that down sometime.

 

He wasn't motivated for brewster? :huh

 

:rofl do you think he was ? The fight stank anyway !:deal

 

What makes you think he wasn't? :huh

Are you just assuming he wasn't motivated becuase he lost? Was there something going on before? Did he say something in an interview?

 

:good he was the big favourite and I was making reference to WEIGHT claiming LL wasnt motivated for his losses ! none of us really know !:bbb

 

He was 36 for the first, 37 for the second.

Yeah well Holyfield has been in noticeable decline due to steroidoveruse during his entire career. He looked like **** against Czyz, Bowe III, then displays his career best performance against Tyson twice, then looks **** against Bean and Lewis I, then displays another fine performance in Lewis II, etc.
He wasn't in his prime but he certainly had a lot left.

Walcott was 37 and 38 when Marciano beat him (with a lot more trouble the first time around, i might add), but everyone gives Marciano credit for those legacy making wins.

 

Finally managed to track down that news story I mentioned.


"On Aug. 13, 1992, the Daily News ran a story in which a
panel of experts - George Foreman, Larry Holmes, Michael
Spinks, Tim Witherspoon, Ernie Terrell, Tommy Morrison,
Marvis Frazier, Earnie Shavers and Angelo Dundee -
weighed in on the most likely of four heavyweights to emerge
as the clear-cut best of boxing's big men while Mike Tyson
served time on a **** conviction. At the time, Donovan
"Razor" Ruddock was preparing for a fight with Lennox
Lewis, Evander Holyfield for the first of his three bouts with
Riddick Bowe.

Ruddock was the experts' choice, garnering five votes to two
for Bowe, one for Lewis and none for Holyfield. "