Lyle vs The Champs

Lyle was very good, he knocked out Shavers, beat Bonavena, and gave Foreman pure hell. But, he was slow handed and a bit ponderous. I am not certain he would have beaten Cleveland Williams, who had much faster hands and about the same punch.

 

Well, you'd find many that would argue the "fairly good skills" part among other things. But I regress.

 

I explained my issue regarding the top 100 label.

Braddock was a light heavy for the first three years of his career. He weighed over 190 in his signature win. H2H, he is one of the more durable, smart, and frustrating heavyweight spoilers with an elite right cross. I rate him at the level of Jimmy Young.

Plenty of footage of old Foreman, Moorer, Rahman, Willard, Carnera. Lyle would beat these men.

Meanwhile, Lyle would even struggle with the injured Walcott Layne upset, because he would try to box him at range instead of out work and smother him.

By others you mean Briggs? If you have a hard time seeing Walcott set him self apart from that big clown against common opponents, than I dont know what to say. Walcott even has better developed biceps if that is your thing.

 

So despite us both classing Jersey inside the top 100 HW you have issue with me saying I class him inside the top 100 HW. Gotcha.

For earlier I was referring to men pre Johnson.

You can't guarantee Lyle beats any true champion since he never once managed it in his career. What I am saying is, of those 3 contenders I do not see Walcott, Braddock and Briggs all going 3-0 first time of asking.

There are others also who I wouldn't see going 3-0 but there are plenty who I would see going 3-0

Wladimir (if allowed to clinch)
Lewis
Holyfield
Bowe
Tyson
Holmes
Ali
Foreman
Frazier
Liston
Marciano
Charles
Louis
Baer
Tunney
Dempsey

Omitted names I don't see going 3-0. The omitted names I am most unsure of omitting are Michael Spinks, Floyd Patterson and Jack Johnson.

 

No, you don't get it. Top 100 implies Walcott could be as low as 100, that is ****. I say top 30 at least.

Lyle only challenged one true champion, and it was a man few in history could beat. True champion isn't a magical label. Look at Briggs path. Gets hand picked as an easy defense because he just got thrashed by Wilson and done nothing meaningful since, gets out boxed by a 50 year old retiree and wins the lineal on a controversial decision. Who couldn't beat that Foreman with those judges?

I disagee with those no names. Holyfield could be just as erratic and injury prone as Walcott. Bowe was erratic and poorly conditioned, Baer was all over the place, Charles had a style that didn't appeal to judges, and was prone to dropping disputed decisions in his best days, Lewis in every stage of his career got caught and upset...and your putting him against two punchers in the Rahman mode he could overlook. Tyson was a victim of two famous huge upsets...etc. Unless you are putting these guys at their best in a vacuum, in which case Walcott also goes 3 and 0.




And would only Wlad be allowed to clinch...
Cause that would effect more than him. Lewis, Ali, Holyfield...etc

 

But the top 100 implies he could no be below 100. I don't rank him below 100 and neither do you.

Lyle should not be presumed to be victorious over any champion imo, he could and maybe even would beat some but to assume it is not overly intelligent imo.

And that's what a forum is for. I think those names do go 3-0 throughout their career. The names I missed off I do not think would go 3-0, through their career.

Assuming Walcott hits his prime after the war, he still loses 10 fights to a variety of opponents and a variety of styles. Very few champions were that inconsistent.

 

That's a 9 year 35 fight run almost exclusively fought against stiff competition. Holyfield in the 90s didn't even take have that many fights and he still lost 4 times and drew once.

Walcott was only conclusively beat by Louis, Marciano, Charles, and Layne. He was injured against Layne.

His losses to Maxim and Ray were close and disputed. All 5 fights with these men were close.

Ray, Louis, Marciano, and Layne were all swarming pressure fighters.

Charles and Maxim were versatile boxers who could and did turn to two handed swarming pressure against Walcott.

 

This does nothing more than demonstrate that against these 3, it would be a pleasant surprise for Jersey to go 3-0 first time of asking.

 

Nah, Walcott is a bad match up for Lyle and Quarry. Not once did they demonstrate they could steal a decision from a mobile technician like Maxim, Layne, and Ray did. Surely Lyle would have beat Young once, or Quarry could have at least figured out Machen or Ellis. You really think Ellis, a declined Machen, and Young are superior and more consistent than Walcott?

Im not sure why you are high on Mac Foster, and why you are grouping him with genuine good contenders. Alex Stewert of his day.

 

This is kind of how I see it.

I would be wary of picking him outright in nearly all cases, though I am sure he would beat somebody.

 

You don't think he should be favored over Briggs, Rahman, Old Foreman, and Moorer?

Three fighters he could survive a shoot out with who had vulnerabilities to right crosses, and one he nearly defeated 20 years younger.