Despite your disertation all objective evidence points to a Lewis ko if they fought regardless of any reason they didn't end up fighting. Plenty of guys don't end up fighting. We can objectively analyze their strengths and weaknesses and overall career to make an educated guess on the winner. Any assertion that one ducked the other is subjective and shouldnt factor into an objective analysis regarding who would win. Btw I highly doubt Lewis was afraid of Byrd
You really are trying too hard, here. As has already been argued, there are a number of good reasons Lewis took the course of action he did, but you seem fixated on the idea that Lewis didn't think he could beat Byrd, for which you have no evidence in support. Fair enough. Rahman got a Draw against Tua. But it doesn't really take away from my point since, post-Lewis, Tua wasn't seen as exceptional (and one might argue he was never much to write home about, in the first place). Either way, you should still stop pretending Rahman was something special. He wasn’t and neither was Kali Meehan. You seem to be entirely oblivious to the fact that it was King, who sought to prevent Lewis/Byrd from happening. Do you think King followed Lewis to Ghana, without having already lined up Holyfield/Byrd, including an HBO deal he could walk straight into? And even putting the above aside, Lewis relinquished the IBF title (Sept 5th 2002), as agreed with King, and the Holyfield/Byrd bout took place Dec 12th 2002. Why do you think there was a rush to get a fight together, when both Byrd and Holyfield were King fighters? There wasn't a whole lot in it and who cares? Rahman was quite ordinary. Kind of undermines the quality of Byrd’s win then, doesn’t it? It was 7 fights in 5 years (’98 to ’02) I was referring to - prior to Holyfield’s meeting with Byrd - that’s less than 2 fights per year. For comparison, from ’89 to ’93, Holyfield fought 11 times. Because, despite you writing that you don't rate it that highly, you have previously bigged up Byrd’s victory over Holyfield, treating it as though it was some kind of major upset and declaring it as “one of the more dominant official wins over Holyfield since Bowe 3” - perhaps forgetting that Holyfield/Bowe III occurred 7 years earlier; and, at 40 years old by Dec 2020, Holyfield had by all accounts looked finished. Yeah and I’ve put it in its proper context. Just about anyone who watched that fight saw an old and slow Holyfield who, as you have also pointed out, was injured during the fight. Most of the press were writing eulogies on Holyfield's career, afterwards. Yes - the version of Byrd you have invented; the one you think Lewis was too scared to fight. Byrd scraped by on some very **** poor performances, along with some questionable/dubious decisions. Hardly what could be called convincing wins. He'd also already been hammered by Ibeabuchi and Wlad and hadn't been fairing all that well against Vitali, until the latter quit. All-in-all, it was a fairly charmed career, despite the heavy beatings. And, there's nothing to suggest Lewis would not have dished out on Byrd his worst beating of all. Who said Byrd's win against Vitali wasn't genuine? Is this some vague attempt at trying to put Byrd's win over Vitali on a par with Lewis's win over the same? Like I suggested from the top, you really are trying too hard, here. So what? Why? Does it matter? It isn't my stipulation. It's your assertion. “Had Lewis thought he could beat Byrd, he wouldn't have ducked him, and he did duck him.” - Bah Lance You call the fact that Byrd’s own promoter, being so afraid of the fight coming off, that he was prepared to pay Lewis $1M to relinquish the title, a BS reason? It’s pretty clear that you are prepared to overlook any facts, which don’t align with your opinion. I haven’t made that argument. I just don’t care that the fight didn’t happen. You very obviously do care, though. No. Lewis deliberately avoided him because he had plenty of valid reasons NOT to fight Byrd. That he ended up fighting Vitali, his WBC mandatory instead, the heir apparent of the division, who ranks highly as one of Lewis’ best wins (often mentioned in the top-5), says enough.
No objective evidence points to a Lewis KO win. For reasons explained I don't see a deserving mandatory challenger ranked #2 behind only Wlad as a guy Lewis just happened to miss for....reasons. Lewis choice to give up his HBO date and fight no one instead of Byrd. Despite your disagreement with my logic, it is valid to be concerned about Lewis chances when he ducked the guy. People use this logic all the time in fantasy situations. You just don't like the possibility of Byrd besting old Lewis because it makes you uncomfortable. I know your posts well...they have a certain bent that makes me disregard everything you say. You have yourself to blame.
Of course there is no hard evidence to prove Lewis wouldn't fight Byrd because he wasn't confident he could beat him. Same for most alleged ducks in boxing history. So? The Tua win launched Byrd back to the top of the ratings and got him good press, so our opinion doesn't really matter anyway in this argument. I'm aware of the King situation. I followed it. King's story was he bought the title to speed up the process so he could secure Holyfield vs Byrd for the vacant HBO date because Lewis already said he would not fight Byrd and intended to vacate the belt at the deadline...which would have killed the winter HBO slot. Anything else is speculation. I'm sorry, I've lost patience with your continued attempts to mis-frame me with hyperbolic non-sense that only seems like bait to drag this out. You say I treated Byrd vs Holyfield as a major upset. If you got that from what I have written...your reading comprehension is either so poor that Im amazed this debate went as long as it did or you are just deliberately throwing down strawmen out of habit or desperation to argue against something. Yes, Lewis got to Vitali. After taking time off because he couldn't find an opponent other than Byrd...until Johnson came along in a nothing fight that became Vitali because of pressure from the venue to save the card when Johnson pulled and nobody else was available. Vitali avoided Byrd too....Kudos to Lewis for not wasting his training camp and ducking his highly rated Mando (Byrd) for the man he beat (Vitali) who was then regarded as a soft quitter. All of your latest responses are just gonna force me to repeat myself and who wants to do that. Enjoy your weekend.
I think it's fair to speculate how Lewis would have done against a skilled, defensive southpaw at any time, nevermind at the end of his career. I believe he would have KO'd Byrd if it was prime v prime, but I have no idea how he would have done really in 2002 or 2003. He looked dreadful against Vitali, to be fair.
This is exactly my thoughts. In his prime, Lewis would have the conditioning and speed to catch Byrd. In 2002, I think even Lewis himself doubted he could pull that off. At the least, Byrd might have made him look very slow and clumsy... I think any result short of a KO would have significantly tarnished Lewis. A loss would have been devestating and Lewis was still hunting for paydays.
I've responded specifically to the points YOU raised and YOUR version of events. I have not mis-framed you. You brought up the Byrd/Holyfield fight and you did frame it as, "one of the more dominant official wins over Holyfield since Bowe 3". You did so without acknowledging where Holyfield was in his career by then, which was my challenge to you. There is neither hyperbole nor nonsense in what I've replied to you with. What's more, I am not sure you have even understood my replies. At what point did I mention Tua/Byrd in the post you have responded to? I didn't. If you either can't be bothered to read my responses properly; just want to ignore them or you simply can't absorb salient details, which happen also to be in opposition to your misstatements, that's your problem - Don't brush it off as mine. For you to take aim at my reading comprehension is a bit rich - see previous comment above. Equally priceless is you suggesting I am throwing down a strawman, when I literally pointed out your blatant attempt at doing so, in my previous post. Moreover, this is a minor point, which you have probably spent more time on trying to justify than your original assertion : " This content is protected ". That's all you have been doing from the outset, since you claimed Lewis did not think he could beat Byrd. If you fail to acknowledge facts of events, as they actually transpired, and rather interpret them to suit your personal viewpoint or wishes, how else do you think a discussion like this is going to pan out? Even now, you do not accept what actually happened in relation to King's involvement, preferring to align yourself with King's self-promoting version of the story. The above just adds to your: - dismissal of the idea that a Byrd match-up was financially unattractive. - making no allowance for the fact that Lewis was considering retirement in 2002, save the chance of a rematch with Tyson for another big payday and that any moves he made, from June 2002 onwards, were geared towards that cause. - having no answer for Jones Jr not wanting to fight Byrd either (does he get a pass then?) - ignoring the fact that VK was also a Lewis Mandatory and was the initial target of the Lewis camp, post-Tyson - implying Byrd's victory over VK was comparable to Lewis' over the same, but not wanting to clarify that point, it seems. The above are just several of the problems with your sweeping statement and supporting argument - just off the top of my head. Despite you repeatedly mentioning how you followed the events at the time, your knowledge of them comes across as sketchy, at best, and your appraisal of Byrd, Holyfield and V Klitschko at the time seems, again, designed entirely to support your view of why Lewis did not fight Byrd. Wishing Lewis had fought Byrd and disliking him for not doing so is fine, if that's how you feel about it, but your initial assertion was wrong and what you have used in support of your view is weak, to say the least. I am sorry you seem to have a hard time accepting perfectly acceptable counterpoints and that you have felt the need to keep repeating the same non-arguments back to me. But that was your choice. You could have just as easily addressed the counterpoints made - but, then again, perhaps not.
If Lewis can demolish Tyson in 2002 which he did, surely he can be favoured against Byrd at the same time
Well, I gave you a chance but by ignoring my very specific example of your mis-framing my points with strawmen I have no choice but to put you on ignore. All you had to say was "my bad, you never said or even implied Byrd/Holyfield was a major upset. " But for some weird reason you responded with another strawman by reacting as if I said the "dominant win" was the hyperbolic misframing. What a weird thing to do. What could possibly be you excuse for reading this below quote and conclude I was talking about the "dominant win" quote ...you see that bold text.....yeah... "I'm sorry, I've lost patience with your continued attempts to mis-frame me with hyperbolic non-sense that only seems like bait to drag this out. You say I treated Byrd vs Holyfield as a major upset. If you got that from what I have written...your reading comprehension is either so poor that Im amazed this debate went as long as it did or you are just deliberately throwing down strawmen out of habit or desperation to argue against something." But yeah...you still misframed the "dominant win" quote too, as for several posts you have operated as if I didn't acknowledge or even provide the context of the victory. So let's put this to bed .. Holyfield was 40 Holyfield was past prime Holyfield was less active than when he was a young man Holyfield injured his shoulder after missing Byrd very wide Holyfield was top 5 Holyfield was still the second most popular Heavyweight in the world Holyfield had not been dominated by anyone in defeat since Bowe Holyfield was still reasonably active. Injuries that occur during a match are fair game. Byrd was expected to win in a testing fight, not dominate and clown Evander. One last time. Byrd's win over Holyfield had value as a good win for it's time and as a prominent showcase on a big stage. I never once called it an upset, painted it as a great win, or argued it as anything but an impressive performance over a past prime great who up to that point had been holding his own as a top contender. Here's another example of why you are impossible to debate maturely. You said and I quote Byrd's "default victory over Vitali. " I responded by saying his win was as genuine as Lewis' win, nothing more or less.....and it is, but for two or three posts you've been chasing an argument and again misframing my comment as a comparison of performances on my part. It clearly was not as I was directly responding to your "default win" statement. You think you are being clever I suppose, but ultimately, this just shows me I'm wasting my time taking to you. Why the hell would I want to debate someone that seems to misframe everything I say with strawmen? Again, you either lack the reading comprehension to keep up or you are trolling... cool for you, I guess. You suckered me in on this one, won't happen again.
No. Tyson was shot and had no defense after a few minutes. Byrd was a cagey, defensive southpaw. Byrd beats 2002 Tyson as well.
Byrd was at least about as good as anyone Lewis beat in 2000-'03 actually. Whether Byrd in 2002 would have beat 1999 Holyfield is an open question. Maybe. People will say Vitali was better than Byrd, but Byrd did beat him. And Byrd wasn't even much good. It really was a weak era once Tyson and Holyfield and Bowe were gone or well past it.
That's fair to say and, from a Lewis detractor like yourself, really quite reasonable. Oh! Wait a minute - Did you just say, "as well"? Does this mean as well as Lewis? Pound-for-Pound, skill-wise, it's a fair comment. Yes and, I think, if one looks at VK/Byrd, in terms of the result alone, one could be forgiven for believing Byrd was the better man. But either case is moot. The salient point is that Byrd could never replicate what Vitali did against Lewis - not even a dilapidated Lewis. Nor could Byrd replicate what Rahman did - He couldn't shut out Tua, like Lewis did, either. Byrd simply doesn't have the size, power or style, for that matter, to pose any type of offensive threat to Lewis. There would be zero pressure of that type on Lewis. So this leaves Byrd with his essentially negative style and his ability to eek out decisions and, if you need a gift decision to register a 'W' against Oquendo, you ain't beating Lewis (who never lost by way of decision). This, I can agree with you on.
