Lennox Lewis vs Jack Dempsey

Actually if you look into compubox stats, the number is more like 80 power shots landing, now if one assumes 1/2 are to the face and the other half to the body, then that's 40 shots per fight. But adjustments for blow outs such as Ruddock etc, would lower this fight. So I would call 5 full on shots to be extremely conservative. Hell Briggs, Vitali, Mercer, hit him much more than that. Even Tua before he turtled in their fight, landed a full on flush left hook to Lewis' chin. And even as one sided as it was, Tyson also landed a couple of chin punches to Lewis' chin, especially in round 4. So this idea that just any fighter can catch Lewis clean and the fights over, is beyond silly. It's just plain stupid.

And normally speaking when you're doing a H2H comparison you don't pick out a fighters worst performance to determine an outcome, otherwise we'd be comparing Lewis' best fights against the version of Dempsey who lost to fireman Flynn or a couple of his fights with Willie Meehan.

 

Tyson was out of gas so early in that fight. His technique, leverage was so bad at the end of his career, he couldn't even knock the likes of Mccbride out anymore. I suspect Tyson even lost his power after the first 2 rounds of any fight at that stage. It is universally accepted that the Tyson who showed up in the Lewis fight was a ghost, in fact even in his previous fight against Nielsen he looked very poor. No sane ****yst would have given him any chance against Lewis in 2002 outside a Lucky punch.

How can you be so sure of the power behind Tua's shot against Lewis? Everyone agrees he was horribly slow and lethargic in that fight.

Danny Williams has already commented that Tyson in the first round of their fight, no one has ever hit me as hard as he did, he even commented that Vitali's punching power is nothing.

Lewis was in the perfect place at the right time, his most serious competitors were shot and the others were bums.

 

This content is protected

 

"I wonder what Hitler's reaction was to the news?"

It was Hitler who first declared war on the United States I believe, not vice versa.

The United States had declared war on Japan.

Hitler decided to honor his treaty with Japan.

 

Read my post again, he couldn't maintain his power beyond the first 1-2 rounds. Tyson tore his knee up in the first round of the Williams fight, prior to that accident he was battering Williams with punches.

Lewis was not shot, that is the biggest BS. I saw no difference in terms of speed, power, legs between the Lewis who fought Mercer in 96, Mccall in 97 and the Lewis who fought Tyson in 2002 and Vitali in 2003. He was in his prime. He had another 2-3 years to give to boxing.

My suspicion he wanted to get out clean seeing that his competition from the Klitshko brothers would be fierce and raise huge question marks over his carefully planned well crafted legacy is justified.

 

A question for Brits

I was interested in this boxing debate about WWII

but one thing I was wondering about. Some pointed out that it was/is Britain and not England

But I was wondering why Churchill (who I assume was informed on this matter) published a book in the late thirties called "While England Slept."

Shouldn't it have been Britain that was sleeping.

And John F. Kennedy, the son of our British ambassador, published a book in 1940 called "Why England Slept."

 

It was common for people to conflate Britain and England back then.

The national identities of Scotland and Wales almost evaporated in the 19th century, and enjoyed a renaissance in the post war period.

 

I would invite you to watch the two fights prior to Lewis' fight with Vitali and tell me that wasn't a shot version of Lewis. He was never that slow and lethargic in any other fight I've seen of his, and I've seen them all. His timing was never that bad either.

 

Lenni says he did not train or prepare properly for Vitali. I am pretty sure if he had trained better, he would not have been slow and lethargic. He came in at the heaviest weight of his career as well.

But now i know you will talk about he lost motivation, he had achieved everything, made money, he owed nothing to nobody e.t.c.

 

Not really, it amounts to the same thing, which that it was time for him to go.

 

A fighter should only bow out when he has nothing left to give to the sport, which was not the case with lenni. After realizing there were no more shot or ordinary fighters around, i agree he did the smart thing by protecting his carefully planned, well crafted so called legacy.

He is one of the few boxers to have protected his wealth, a smart guy and a good role model outside the ring, i will definately give him that. But to call him the best 5, best 3 or even Best ever in history is even pushing it.

 

I believe the Kennedy book , like the one about the PT boat were ghosted. Americans call it Britain,I call it England.

 

Definitely top ten for me.:good

 

Here I have to disagree.

A fighter should bow out of the sport, when it doesn't serve his interests to be in the sport.

We have seen so many great fighters stay on too long, to damage their health, and suffer humiliating defeats.

We should be happy to have seen Lewis retire with his health and money intact, and without taking a beating from a fighter who wouldn't have been worthy to lace up his gloves a few years back.

 

It actually did serve Lewi's interests to be in the sport, he had mostly fought either bums and his two most serious competitors were shot. Klits were going to present him a fresh challenge and i as a nuetral boxing fan was keen to seen how a Prime Lewi would do against fighters who were in their peak and not shot for once and would also negate his size, reach, weight, strength advantage.

He was not a shot finished fighter who was at the risk of losing his bearings in 2004. My suspicion that he retired not to keep his health, money in tact but to protect his carefully planned, well crafted legacy which the Klits would have probably exposed is very justified.