The case for Lennox Lewis being GOAT

Perhaps becuase he fought bigger and stronger fighter's as opposed to the guys marciano face.

 

thought the post ment the more technically puncher got the higher percent, than the cruel puncher. I was sure the post ment that.

 

Yes, Marciano broke bones in the arms, sheer off Layne's fronth teeth.

 

and your point is :huh

 

I can't say I'm shocked that a post arguing for the most recent (real) HW champion as the greatest of all time spurs a good deal of heated discussion.

It's really inevitable. HW boxing has a very rich history in the U.S. and it's natural that Americans will take issue with such claims. There's certainly a degree of bias, but it works both ways. I don't doubt a lot of Europeans are biased against American fighters as well (or biased in favor their best HW to date).

The case for Lewis is always the same general argument:

Fantasy Matchups

'Lewis will beat x,y,z great heavyweight because they never had to face a skilled HW of Lewis' size and would be at a disadvantage.'

Well, I see several questions/problems arising here.

First of all, that statement works both ways. Lewis never faced a fighter with the kind of offensive talent that Dempsey, Frazier, or prime Tyson possessed. He also never fought a HW with the stamina and work-rate of Marciano. I'm not looking to get caught up in a fantasy argument because they're never really all that productive. People have their favorite fighters and that's that usually. However, I will say that I think the majority of posters (myself included a good deal of the time) do not take the proper time to give a thorough analysis when it comes to fantasy fights and examine all angles. I haven't looked very hard, but I have yet to notice anyone sitting on loads of v-cash.

Also, how one defines GOAT significantly influences one's opinions. Should there be some type of relativism used, or do we go purely on who we think would win an elimination tournament if someone managed to invent a time machine?

Personally, I don't put a whole lot of stock in fantasy match-ups. Judging a fighter's greatness purely by who he could beat in his prime is a seriously lacking analysis in my opinion. I think equating a fighter's prime with his greatness is an extremely flawed approach.

I'm not saying that I don't think Lewis had a great career. He did, but based on a lot of different factors, I wouldn't rate him as an all-time great.

I think that you have to take a lot of factors into account when measuring greatness and it's certainly not a perfect science. I also think that there has to be some contemporary relativism mixed into the equation as well. Lewis can't win just because human beings are getting bigger.

 

Of course. Marciano just feasted on Light heavies and has-beens... Tyson just fought has-beens.

 

Not everyone agrees. They certainly are within the same league.

 

It's such broad-blanketed statements that I disagree with. There's more nuance in this matchup.

 

Yeah but most of those hasbeens where pretty big and strong as oppose to 175-190 pound fighters )

 

No way. Don't you know that the lighter you are the far stronger you are. Roberto Duran never knocked anyone out at lightweight, it's only when he moved up to welter and middle he was sparking everyone.