(PRIME) Lennox Lewis vs. (PRIME) Wladimir Klitschko

I should have known you would provide nothing short of a comprehensive response to my inquiry. I've been a tad strapped for time today, so I apologize in advance if I fail to address your rationales fully.

However, I do find variety in perceptions rather interesting and here I can see why Wlad/Haye and Lewis/Tua were picked as examples of respective footwork, but perhaps have a different take on comparative effectiveness.

Wlad did show mostly good footwork and distance adjustment when applying his forward pressure against Haye, but the pattern of Haye’s defensive reconnaissance without attack formed very quickly. Much of what Haye was doing with his own short moves forward could be considered feinting, which Wlad was hypersensitive to and responded to accordingly. This doesn’t take away from his holding that form, while the action was settled in this pattern. But, this seems to be a view of Wlad's footwork in a single, situational context.

In contrast, when Haye actually made a conscious effort to land and moved forward (which he wasn’t particularly good at any way, since he preferred opponents to walk onto him and within counter-punching range), Wlad’s outright evasive footwork, whilst appearing effective, was exaggerated and almost invariably took him out of position. Again, this was fine against an opponent who, a) rarely made a forward move and, b) put himself out of position during almost every rare offensive strike attempted.

I would suggest Lewis/Tua is a superior example.

Firstly, because Lewis was able to fight off the back foot, which is something we never saw Wlad do (and If there is an example of him doing so in any intended, sustained, and controlled manner, I’d like to see it).

Secondly, Lewis was able to blend offensive and defensive footwork quite seamlessly; was more varied in his movement and intent. In the main, Lewis would, not unlike what you described Wlad doing, be able to hold position and a range in which he could either move forwards to strike or backwards to evade (still able to punch) or, quite differently from Wlad, shift left or right to create an angle and a fresh attacking position.

Thirdly, and perhaps more significant is that Lewis had the confidence to deliver big shots without losing his balance or find himself out of position. Indeed, Lewis would allow his feet to move with and correct any stray momentum of his mass and continue to attack as he did so.

Conversely, Wlad openly admitted that he held back from throwing the right for fear of losing his balance and placing himself in a vulnerable position (This was echoed by Manny Steward).

Also, I consider Tua to be more of an offensive threat and the greater competitor than Haye who, for the most part, relied on defensive reflexes, counter-punching and the power that brought with it (unless he was against an obviously overmatched opponent, in which case would go on the attack).

On balance, I do not find Lewis and Wlad to be equals in the footwork department - not even roughly.


Continued in the next post...

 

Continued from the last post...

Agreed (mostly). I can honestly say that I do not think Wlad had any type of inside game, neither defensive nor offensive. He didn’t tie a fighter up and I do not count his hugging and leaning as boxing skill. Of course, clinching is part of the game, but it is not boxing and his leaning down on opponents was, at times, beyond the pale.

If it had occasionally featured here and there in his bouts, no one would pay much attention to it, but this aspect of his approach to fights actually formed a critical part of his repertoire, which involved, as you suggest, no deployment of an inside offensive.

Agreed. But what I would add here is that, apropos of my comments re Lewis’ footwork, he was able to use this to do more offensively, while being defensive, take more risks, and not be as vulnerable. For example, you might see Lewis evade with a quick step to his left and throw his left hand at the same time, as his opponent looks for him and finds air.

Not a big difference in this one, but I view Lewis’ ability to combine his defense footwork with offensive moves as plus for him here.

You kind of touch on why I believe Lewis is superior in this department. Lewis could throw variations of a punch, extending his arsenal quite significantly. He did this with the jab, the straight right the left hook and the uppercut.

He could also control the weight and tempo if his punches; constantly vary this throughout a fight if the situation allowed, and he wasn't shy about going to the body as well as the head. This made it difficult for his opponents to find a consistent rhythm themselves, or align with Lewis rhythm to time him.

Lewis once said of Wlad: “

This content is protected

”

I lean in favor of these sentiments.

I think it demonstrates the extent to which Lewis’ and Wlad’s respective skills were tested and, when viewed through this lens, Lewis wins hands down.

Lewis demonstrably and successfully deployed different tactics, across a wider and superior array of competition. Now, people might agree/disagree on what this means, but I tend to towards it being a strong sign of a greater skillset having been involved.

The whole is far greater than the sum of its parts and Lewis, as a complete package, was a collective powerhouse and some distance ahead of Wlad, in my opinion. So, it probably won’t surprise you to know that I give Wlad next to no chance of beating Lewis, save an anomalous event; no more than I think Wlad would ever beat the best version of Fury.

Wlad had things his own way almost all of the time; typically, against notably over-matched competition. After being taken out by three unrated opponents, due to his lacking in that innate Ring IQ, which truly great fighters have, Wlad developed a no-risk, defensive style, which included a lot of 'not boxing' tactics. This became the standard we would see for nigh on ten years, until someone he couldn't apply it to came along.

It will seem extreme to some, but I’d make Lewis favorite 95% to 5%. (And I'd still feel that I am being generous to Wlad.)

 

No amount of clinching, grabbing and holding is going to save Vlad's overvalued butt.

Lewis by late stoppage.

 

Thank you & please don't worry, I find your responses to be comprehensive.

Tua was a flat footed slugger and Haye a relatively flat footed/back foot (at HW), power, counter puncher. I concede Lewis nor Wlad needed JJW-esque footwork to outmanoeuvre them.

I agree Tua was more of an offensive threat in the sense he had greater power than Haye & certainly attempted to come forwards & close the distance vs Lewis, with far greater frequency than Haye did vs Wlad, though I see Haye as clearly the more mobile & lighter on his feet. Tua represented the greater jeopardy, Haye the more difficult to outmanoeuvre, imo.

Both Lennox & Wlad were effective at keeping Tua & Haye out of their own punching range for almost the entirety of their respective contests. It was the way in which Wlad used his feet to pressure Haye without allowing him to get into his own punching range, which really impressed me. The astuteness of the strategy as much as the technical execution.

I completely agree that Wlad was more risk averse. I also agree Lewis was more natural, more fluid, whilst Wlad was more manufactured, in footwork just as much as that statement applies to their general attributes and approaches as fighters as a whole.

In summary, I respect your opinion that Lewis's footwork was far more effective than Wlad's, whilst standing by mine that I believe they were roughly equally as effective as one another.

Whilst I think they were broadly equally effective, I accept there were difference. e.g. I agree that Lewis's footwork was more varied, as you've alluded to, more fluid & less risk averse, whilst the Steward trained version of the "manufactured" Wlad was probably even more effective at being so utterly disciplined at maintaining (a safe) distance control.

Lewis's less risk averse and more creative footwork was more effective at creating offensive angles, Wlad more effective (when allied with his clinching) at avoiding jeopardy by keeping the opponent from getting within their punching range. Lewis's superior chin, and specifically his superior confidence in his chin, meant he could take chances with his footwork that Wlad was not prepared to, it also meant he could be tagged more often than peak Wlad.

Now, if you asked me whose footwork was conducive to more exciting fights, there's no comparison, Lennox takes that by the proverbial million miles.

 

Seems like we're pretty much in agreement on inside "fighting" & defence, with the minor exception that as much as I hated it (it was the primary reason I wanted Wlad to lose pretty much every fight during his reign), and feel Wlad should have been penalised more often & more harshly than we has, in reality his clinching did prove to be an effective form of close range defence.

Again I agree with your comments on punch variety, and again, as with footwork, feel Lewis was a more natural & more fluid puncher, Wlad more manufactured and risk averse, but still damn effective. I do think Wlad had the better left hook.

I agree Lewis was more versatile, could win fights in a greater variety of ways (e.g. Golota, Grant & Vitali were far different performances from Tua & Holyfield) & was a vastly more exciting fighter to watch. During his 11-year reign, Wlad just did what he needed to, to beat who he was fighting, and did it successfully every time.

As per my initial response, I agree Lewis clearly beat the better opposition on the whole, even though I suspect I rate Wlad's opposition more highly than you do.

Finally, it's clear you have a far lower opinion of Wlad & his career than I do, which is fine. I probably rank him higher than the Classic Forum average & you probably lower. For what it is worth, I can't recall a champion at any weight, and certainly not HW, in my life time, who was routinely in fights as boring and 1-sided as during his reign, which is why I almost always wanted him to lose.

 

First class analysis! .

 

going with Lewis, but should he lose he would have to be held to his claim of never losing to the same guy twice, in which case there would be a trilogy, a better question is once Lewis beats an opponent does he always beat them?

 

Prime Lewis was dangerous against dangerous opponents. And Wlad would be viewed as a danger by him, he simply pulls a Corrie Sanders on Wlad, but ends it in 1 instead of 2 rounds.

 

lol, who? yes. the exception that proves the rule. ty.

 

fixed it

 

nice

 

you really think Wlad is great huh? because he beat Wach?

 

tell me YDKSAB without telling me YDKSAB

 

A decade at the top tells me so

 

it was a phony top. that's a **** answer