lets talk about chris "rapid fire" byrd

That's not what I meant. I am claiming that because his name is ASSOCIATED with more charismatic personalities that his memory has a better chance of surviving the test of time.

 

Tyson was no threat to Lewis at that time. Im not saying Byrd would knock him out, but he certainly had the ability to make guys look very bad. Personally I think John Ruiz and Chris Byrd at that time had more of a chance to make Lewis look bad than Klitschko and Tyson. Their styles are horrible to fight against. Tyson came right at you, and Klitschko was thought to fall apart when the fight was taken to him which had been the case with both brothers in the past and the reason Lewis fought out of character, but effectively in that fight.

 

I think that's rather silly, considering that Tyson was (a) faster than Rahman, (b) a heavier puncher than Rahman and (c) more skilled that Rahman, even in 2002. Tyson at that point hadn't lost in his three year comeback and -contrary to the opinion of some at the time- had beaten some good boxers.

Certainly, at the time, everyone thought that Tyson was a threat and that Byrd was a non-entity who would pose no problems for Lewis, considering that Wlad was considered a lesser version of Lewis.

No-one ever beat Lewis on points and no-one who tried to outbox him even came close. Ruiz's chin would be in trouble against Lewis and Byrd, as has been stated (and ignored) on multiple occasions in this thread, lost to a green Wladimir Klitschko.

As for Vitali, he wasn't THAT underrated in 2003. People knew he could punch and that he was very big and strong, and that he'd been beating Byrd until the infamous quitting (which was what most people held against him) in the 9th. Looking back, I can't see how one can say that Vitali's style was any easier to face than Ruiz's or Byrd's.

Trying to spin Ruiz and Byrd into superior challengers to Tyson and Klitschko is revisionist in the extreme. Kirk Johnson was also a bigger challenge in 2002-2003 than Ruiz or Byrd.

 

Well I disagree, (Ruiz beat Johnson in 2002). First of all Tyson was very inconsistent in his comeback. There was in fact a time when I thought Tyson was as ready as he could be for Lewis. That was in 2000, starting with the Francis fight, then his blowout of Savarese and then Golota. He was staying active, his weight was in check, and he was progressing up in talent. At that point, I felt Tyson would have been a real threat to win the title. Then he takes a year off, comes in horribly out of shape for Nielson, dumps Tommy Brooks, who was doing an excellent job for him, and moves his training camp to Hawaii to train for Lewis. He brings in Panama Lewis and Ronnie Shields who he had never worked with, there was pictures of Tyson smoking pot on the beach, taking advantage of an eldery Wal Mart worker, and you just knew the train was off the tracks, because deep down Tyson didnt want that fight, he was defeated when it was signed.
As far as Byrd and Ruiz, it was a common thought brought about mostly by HBO and Emanuel Steward, that both were terrible fighters and could easily be beaten by the top guys, but one by one, both those guys were knocking them off. First was Ruiz, beating down Kirk Johnson, and Byrd beating Tua, definitely earning their shots. Problem is HBO and Steward wanted money fights, and those fights didnt cut it. Too much risk for too little reward.
I think its fair to say that Lewis never faced anyone like Byrd or Ruiz, so we dont know how he would have reacted against them. Ruiz was frustratingly hard to hit, and annoying with his grappling style. He gave Holyfield fits, beat Johnson, Rahman, and quite a few good fighters in his own right.
As far as Vitali, I think it was also the belief of many he wasnt really prepared to fight a fighter of the caliber of Lewis. He had quit against Byrd, and really hadnt faced any other real threat in his career to shpw his merit. At that point both brothers believed quitting when the going got tough was acceptable in championship boxing. If you really read into his record, it wasnt that impressive at that time in my opinion. Bottom line is, Lewis did the very thing he accused Bowe and Tyson doing to him. Part of it I believe was the difficulty of the fight, and part of it was the monetary factor.
Overall I believe Ruiz and Byrd would have been much more difficult fights for Lewis than Vitali and Tyson.

 

Oh and by the way, Frank Bruno was ahead on points outboxing lewis before Lewis landed the monsters lefthook that changed the fight.

 

(1) I'm a Bruno fight. I know this and every single possible positive proposition that can be said about Frank Bruno.

(2) Bruno didn't come close to winning a decision: he was ahead after 6 rounds, nor more, no less.. Contrary to the modern belief held by some, there are more than 6 rounds in a 12 round fight.

 

:good

 

Come on.

Compare Tyson against Lewis and Rahman against Lewis. You can see that all the statements I made held. Lewis won ONLY due to his being well-prepared; if he hadn't been well-prepared, Tyson would have smoked him.

Ruiz and Byrd haven't knocked anyone off since the 1990s.

Stop it.

Lewis was very close to retiring after the Tyson fight; there was a huge amount of speculation about whether he would retire or carry on. When he did, he picked Kirk Johnson, who was widely considered to be a better opponent than Byrd and a much bigger threat than Byrd. One beat-down that DID occur was Wlad vs. Byrd, on the basis of which most people concluded that Byrd couldn't beat tall boxers; some people were using that fight for their basis for McCline being favoured over Byrd.

All we can say about Ruiz is that the closest boxer to Lewis that he fought (Golota) dumped him on his ass twice and most feel won against him and would have dominated him totally if Golota's loser's spirit hadn't kicked in after five rounds. Ruiz was widely considered to be the worst champion in heavyweight history in 2002-2003.

Vitali was an extremely dangerous late substitute. If Lewis was primarily interested in avoiding difficult fights at that stage, he wouldn't have fought Vitali. Lewis's aim, at that, time, was clearly to have meaningful fights.

What would Ruiz or Byrd bring to the table that either (1) had a track record of troubling Lewis or (2) would at least be something very new, aside from Byrd's southpaw stance?

 

No offense but that's just wrong.

 

I was always a bit fond of Byrd... in the 90s I used to watch him on Tuesday night fights, and at the time aside from the occasional bit on the fledgling Classic Sports or later when HBO first started Boxing After Dark, that was where I was getting most of my exposure to boxing.

Byrd was certainly no KO artist, but he still knew how to put on a good show, and it was pretty obvious that he was head and shoulders above most of the guys he was fighting. He was slick, and smart, and moved beautifully defensively, leaving most opponents befuddled.

Still, it was also obvious that he was often outgunned in terms of punching power by even the mediocre opponents he faced, which made some of his matches feel like walking a tightrope: it doesn't matter how far along you've made it, if you fall at any point, it's still a fall. (This isn't helped by the fact that as intelligent as he could be in the ring, Byrd doesn't always fight smart; his 2006 rematch with Wlad was the sort of fight that put a slightly sick feeling in my stomach, especially with Byrd marching straight into the bigger man).

If he was outgunned before, the increase in the superheavyweight presence in the division at the end of the 90s/start of the 2000s really made things impossible for him. It's pretty obvious in his fights against the Klits that Byrd had no answers at all to solve the huge differences in size and reach. Byrd could outsmart or outmove a lot of heavyweights, but not ones with that sort of build and that jab to keep him frustrated. (And no way in hell would he have done any better against Lewis, either). It reinforced the fact that Byrd really should have been fighting at lightheavyweight or cruiserweight during his career.

 

None taken. Thats why this is a forum, we can all express our opinions. Again I feel it was the general consensus view that they were both non threats. The power of the media was strong. Larry Mercants constant rants of his hatred of Ruiz all during the fight between Ruiz and Johnson, as Ruiz took him apart, frustrated him and came very close to knocking him out before Johnson decided to foul out. The general public applauded Lewis for taking on Vitali over Ruiz or Byrd, but I was always critical of it. I wanted to see how Lewis would deal with Ruiz or Byrds style.
Im not saying Byrd or Ruiz would have beaten Lewis, but at that time, I felt they would pose difficult fights for Lewis, and really didnt feel he would have any problem with Johnson or Vitali for sure. Byrd was the mandatory challenger, regardless of where Lewis was in his career, and I just felt it was hyprocritical of Lewis to duck him after spending a good part of his career being shut out of the big time in America for having the same thing happen to him.

 

Ruiz was very quick at jabbing and getting on the inside, and frustrating his opponent. You saw him take some decent boxers out of their game. Lewis was not comfortable on the inside, and in grappling fights. You saw it in the Mercer fight. Byrd was also good at getting inside and making his opponents miss. He had Ibeabuchi very frustrated before getting caught by a very fast combination. Ike was very quick. Again Im not saying they would beat him, and I would have still favored Lewis in both fights, but it was my belief at that time that both of those fighters would have posed problems for Lewis at that time, because 1, Lewis was slowing down and would have had a hard time catching up to Byrd, who was fighting well at that time, and 2, with Ruiz he would have most likely gotten dragged into an ugly grappling fight with him on the inside, and that was something he wasnt comfortable with. He wouldnt have been able to fight those fights like the Tyson and Vitali fights, on his terms.

 

For the record, I completely agree with you Lewis was not ducking Byrd. There was no danger for LL in fighting Byrd, and probably no money either.

Still, calling fight with Tyson "Legacy fight" is an overstatement. LL was just in time to defeat him before Williams and McBride, and you could probably . Also, you make it sound like LL chosed himself dangerous opponent in Vitali, while the true is that he fought Klitschko only because Kirk Johnson pulled out of the fight.

Anyway, I liked prime Byrd's fights, like the ones against Ike or Tua. No one made Tua look worse than him (well, some did, but only for a couple of rounds).

However, his style relied so much on speed and reflexes it was clear he can't go on like Hopkins. He was slowly losing his speed already few years ago, although his reign was extended by some lucky decisions (Golota, Oquendo).

 

I agree that the Tyson fight is not really what seals his legacy for ME, but it was for the public. And if he'd never fought Tyson, the scanting of him avoiding Tyson would've never ended, so he stopped that myth right there and then. Lewis never got more exposure to the general public than during the Tyson fight. Nobody gave a **** about him fighting Byrd or Ruiz.

 

Agreed,

I for one can testify that I had no interest in seeing either of those fights.