Let's settle this once and for all

I personally go back and forth here. Holmes was never beaten in his prime and that's a big one for me. But his opp was really so, so. An ageing Norton, Weaver when he still was unkown, dito Witherspoon, Mercer and Cooney I suppose. And two of those fights were close,

The Mercer win stands out because Holmes was in his 40's, but otherwise not a great greatest hits.

You have this with Lewis as well, though. He never got Bowe, and Holy and Tyson was past selling date. Vitaly is a very good win, especially for an ageing champion on the way out. Otherwise it's more the manner of the wins than the names. Early KO's of Ruddock, Golota and Grant. A classic KO of Rahman.

So I might lean Holmes for the undefeated in his prime bit, but whichever way really. And I think there are more in the conversation for 3. Wlad had his losses, but also a decade of hardly losing a round. Marciano had a pretty brief stint at the top, but he beat the nr 1 something like five times during that time. Johnson had a great stretch of dominance. It's up for grabs really.

 

The Holmes-Norton fight is one of the best HW fights I have ever watched. Lennox has nothing close. Unfortunately, it was not properly promoted. Norton was a long-lived fighter, he started boxing late and his style was not comfortable for Holmes. This makes this victory all the more valuable. Was the win over the 37-year-old Holy better? In my opinion, definitely not. Was the Holy-Lewis fight better? definitely not. Was 37-year-old Holy better than 35-year-old Norton? neither... in a moment he couldn't cope with John Ruiz and no one strong at all.
The fight with Vitali was a lucky coincidence for Lewis. at best it was left unresolved. Chris Byrd won against Vitali in the same way.
Lewis' losses are terrible. Over 40 years old Holmes was never beaten as much as prime Lewis.
Holmes has everything better - better victories, against better rivals, in a much better style, a better record. Lewis has better PR and charisma

 

James J Jeffries: 1-1
Bob FItzsimmons (W),
Jack Johnson (L)

Jack Johnson: 1-0
Tommy Burns (W).

Jack Dempsey:1-2
Jess Willard (W),
Gene Tunney (L),
Gene Tunney (L).

Joe Louis:9-1
James Braddock (W)
Max Schmeling (W)
Tony Galento (W)
Bob Pastor (W)
Billy Conn (W)
Billy Conn (W)
Tami Mauriello (W)
Joe Walcott (W)
Joe Walcott (W)
Ezzard Charles (L).

Rocky Marciano:4-0
Joe Walcott (W),
Joe Walcott (W),
Ezzard Charles (W),
Archie Moore (W).

Sonny Liston:2-2
Floyd Patterson (W)
Floyd Patterson (W)
Muhammad Ali (L)
Muhammad Ali (L)

Muhammad Ali:8-2
Sonny Liston (W)
Sonny Liston (W)
Floyd Patterson (W)
Ernie Terrell (W)
Zora Folley (W)
Joe Frazier (L)
George Foreman (W)
Ken Norton (W)
Leon Spinks (W)
Larry Holmes (L)

Joe Frazier:2-3
Jimmy Ellis (W)
Muhammad Ali (W)
George Foreman (L)
Muhammad Ali (L)
Muhammad Ali (L)

George Foreman:2-2
Joe Frazier (W)
Muhammad Ali (L)
Evander Holyfield (L)
Mike Moorer (W)

Larry Holmes:1-1
Muhammad Ali (W)
Michael Spinks (L)

Mike Tyson:1-1
Michael Spinks (W)
Lennox Lewis (L)

Evander Holyfield:2-2-1
James Douglas (W)
Riddick Bowe (L)
Riddick Bowe (W)
Lennox Lewis (D)
Lennox Lewis (L)

Lennox Lewis:4-0-1
Shannon Briggs (W)
Evander Holyfield (D)
Evander Holyfield (W)
Hasim Rahman (W)
Vitali Klitschko (W)

Wladimir Klitschko:3-1
Chris Byrd (W)
Alexander Povetkin (W)
Kubrat Pulev (W)
Anthony Joshua (L)

 

Thanks!

Briggs? Do you mean as in lineal? He wasn't ranked nr 1 by The Ring was he?

And with Ali you of course mean lineal.

I'd also add that Charles was nr. 1 with the NBA for the Rocky rematch as well.

 

That's McGrains heavily researched list.

 

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/3-atg-hw-survey.684006/page-10
On the topic I set it is a "dead race" between Lewis and Holmes.
Lewis for me.

 

Sound overall. Again, just shows how much in a class of their own Ali and Louis is.

 

This shows how wrong it is to rely on dry facts in boxing. Why isn't Hashim Rahman with Tyson's 1:1 balance here?

 

To be fair though no one really stayed number 1 long enough as most of the 80s Heavyweights were inconsistent, although Weaver probably had the most consistent run after losing to Holmes where he was number 1 for a few years. Maybe a unification should've happened between them ? but again i did hear that regarding organizations during that era it was hard to make fights happen.

For example Holmes was willing to Coetzee who i believe was number 1 at the time and the fight fell through which wasn't Holmes's fault.

 

I'm not sure it can be settled.

You get this close to the top and, other than Ali and Louis, it comes down to very slight nuances of interpretation to make it border on being an almost unanswerable poser.

I'm a big Lewis fan but I have Holmes ahead of Lewis, here. Their numbers are comparable, but I think Holmes might have the head-to-head edge on Lewis - and even this is a razor thin speculation.

You can't get much more subjective than that in the final analysis and hence I wouldn't disagree with those who have Lewis ahead of Holmes.

 

I honestly don't care how others see it I'm going by what I personally saw and giving my personal take. And idk Holmes still looked fine to me in the Tim fight he really only started to look diminished in the Williams and Spinks fights (though I thought he won the second fight) but I focus mostly on wins and I think Lennox overall had better wins and generally looked better and more dominant in his wins.

 

Holmes was 33 for Witherspoon, which was old at the time. But hard to know for absolutely sure, he peaked late.

Disagree with you about Mercer, as do most, but any way you splice it being stopped by McCall is far worse than having a close fight with Witherspoon.

In terms of emphatic wins Lewis looks better, though. And I really rate the Vitaly win.

 

Sure and my main criteria is wins which is why I rank Lewis higher

 

Holmes' shortcoming (like Wlad's) is that he was never the undisputed champion (Lewis was).
Even when "in the game" there were only two belts WBA and WBC.
Since the fight Holmes Vs. Norton for the WBC belt in 1978, we didn't have an undisputed champion until Mike Tyson in 1987 (there was also a 25-year break - that's an even bigger problem).
Holmes himself is probably the most deserving boxer to promote the third IBF federation.
Holmes' other flaw is how he became a lineal champion (although that's not Holmes' fault, it's Ali's).
Lewis became champion in spectacular fashion, although Briggs was not a spectacular opponent.