Lyle vs The Champs

I think whichever era they were born in they would be classed as unlucky to be born in.

During Holmes era they probably swap the WBA bauble between them. I see none of them being a great champion, I see then always being great contenders considered unlucky. A bit like David Tua I suppose, some men just don't have it to succeed at the highest level.

 

Because of the removal of obstacles for black atheletes to compete, and boxing still attracted top athletic talent.

 

There were a lot of black athletes competing in the 50's and 60's.

I think a greater and more definitive obstacle was that against Eastern Bloc and Cuban athletes.

 

I agree regarding the Eastern and Cuban obstacles which continued through the the 70's and beyond.

While there black athletes competing they still faced a glass ceiling, an example of which was how long it took for Archie Moore to get his shot for Light Heavy Title.

 

Top 100 is insulting. That means he could be as low as 100. 99 better heavier? No way.

Topic at hand.

What makes you think Lyle is beating Walcott? Lyle was out boxed by Quarry, Young twice, and a decling Peralta.

 

Where do you rank him? If it is not inside the top 100 then we will have to agree to disagree, I think he's a lock for the top 100 but admittedly I rate him higher than most.

I didn't necessarily say Lyle. I said Lyle, Quarry and Foster. I can't see Jersey, Braddock or Briggs going 3-0 vs them 3.

 

No,....that's too much information....I think...

 

Stopped reading at Warhol. Andy Murray has just won SPOTY and should have been your pick.

You've ruined it man.

 

One of you is acting like a dirty whoor. I am not going to judge!, it's not my way.

 

Lyle would have knocked out John L. Sullivan.

 

Top 30 lock at the least. Higher than most? He's usually top 20.

Sure, he could. Quarry struggles against faster rangy boxers, even losing to a past it Machen. Mac Foster? A limited slugger that feasted on wash ups. He doesn't belong with these guys.

Braddock in Cinderella run form could as well. I rate Baer and Lewis over Lyle and Quarry.


Briggs probably couldn't. A failed contender that won the lineal title from a retired old man in a robbery. Walcott and Braddock don't need to be lumped in with him.

The worst lineal was Briggs, Carnera, Willard, Hart, Burns, Douglas, and 90s Foreman. Moorer and Rahman weren't bad but incredibly vulnerable. Lyle could beat these guys.

I think he gets out boxed by Braddock and Walcott. Only among the worst in record sense, not actual ability and who they were at their peak.

 

Which puts him in the top 100 right, which is what I said.

Braddock was a LHW who hit a sweet run of form, h2h he isn't that formidable. Some of the earlier men you mention I haven't watched box so can't pass comment.

I do not see it a given that Jersey goes 3-0 with no hiccups same for the others I mentioned.

 

He could probably beat a few of them, but it is hard to justify favouring him in individual cases.

 

Cross era comparisons are difficult to make. If Lyle had been brought up in the Willard era, he could have been a completely different fighter.

But the 70s incarnation that fought Ali and Foreman was a beast, and I'd give him fair chances against anyone up to Sonny Liston with the exception of Joe Louis. He was big, tough, well-conditioned, powerful and had fairly good boxing skills. A combination of these assets wasn't really a thing when Dempsey fought.

 

Never heard of George Godfrey?