If forced to pick, I'll take Holyfield from the early 90s and Holmes from the late 70s over any version of Lewis.
I could never favor Holyfield over Lewis, but I'll take the late 70's Holmes over and version of Lewis and Holyfield.
I, too, would favor the late 70s Holmes over any version of Lewis, or Holyfield, or almost any other fighter...but why couldn't you favor a 1991 version of Holy over Lewis? After all, a lethargic 1999 version of Holyfield fought competitively enough against Lewis that it's hardly far-fetched that a younger, quicker, stronger, and more active version of Holy would have stood a great chance at winning.
Far too accurate and powerful of a jab for a fighter of Holyfield's style to win. Same applies to Tyson, though Tyson's one punch power gives him a far better shot at stopping Lewis.
Holmes was ten times the boxer of Frank Bruno, Zeljko Mavrovic both movers who utilized their jabs, and gave Lewis fits. Holmes was faster slicker and had a better jab than Lewis. I dont think he would KO Lewis but beat him UD12.
Why would someone suggest the version that fought Holyfield was competitive? By most accounts it was either 9-3 or 10-2 I don't consider this to be overly competitive.
Who scored the second fight 9-3 or 10-2???? :huh 7-5 or 8-4 is much more reasonable and indicative of the action that took place. Note, those who had it a draw are, in my view, delusional--there's no doubting Lewis beat Holyfield. But he was most certainly competitive, moreso in the rematch than the original encounter.
Are u kiddin me? For Chrissake, Holmes is a Top 10 HWT of all time ( Bert Sugar says in ESPN and I agree with, Holy nº11 and Lewis just about inside Top 20), LH beat some 20 top level contenders who would become world champs themselves, Lewis is nowhere near the Truth Williams, Tim Witherspoon or Bonecrusher Smith of old so I guess that this is completely subjective issue- yo know, comparing weights, Tyson of 88 and of 2001, level of skill and speed - crap, BewareofDawg, Lewis was the 1st British to win a World HWT Championship of the 20th Century and to be undisputed HWT Champ, also for having beaten every men that beat him and that's how he'll be remembered ( despite some will remember Bruno more than Lennox for some reasons) - good for him, for you and for me with all due respect.
If that is the case then your saying that Lewis had a 7 year prime!!!! Which is titanicly long compared to every other fighter you might rank above him like Tyson who if often described as having a 2 and a bit year prime from 86 to 89, because we couldnt say he was prime when he got beat now could we. Or Holyfield who`s prime will be described as beating Douglas to losing to Bowe. Lewis however by your analysis doesnt get the excuses that other fighters do, you actually suggest he was in his prime against both Mccall and Rahman 7 years apart lol, aye right pal.
I don't see Lewis having problems with Norton. I don't see Lewis getting knocked out fast by Tyson. Lewis dominates Norton to win by UD or late round TKO.