The case for Lennox Lewis being GOAT

No. It is a naked and shamlesly unveiled atempt to imply that 190lb Dempsey would have dominated a modern heavyweight division.

 

I guess we're all entitled to our opinions.

 

If you are a midget and have rose coloured vision do you qualify for a disability alowence?

 

But Griffith deliberatly changed his fighting style when taking on Tiger, based on two previous fights at middleweight when he was more aggressive: Carter and Don Fullmer, which he lost, one by easy knockout. Tiger then changed his style when taking on Torres. Both with success. Why? Well, it's obvious.


ps. Also, when fighters jump up in weight, they more often than not actually weigh around the same as their opponent (as we all know of course), whereas Dempsey would be outweighed by 30-40 pounds. That's a huge difference against a fighter of Lewis's calibre.

 

lol, i like your posts and respect you defending the older fighter's but i think a all time great lewis with his size advantage is a favourite against most all time great heavyweights and defo smaller ones like dempsey and marciano.

 

For whatever it is worth Ray Arcel was of the same opinion.

 

With all due respect to Ray Arcel,

he trained a lot of fighters from the early part of the 20th century, making him likely to be more partial towards those men.

 

He isn't. Dempsey doesn't match that well against modern greats and that's that. He's too small- and, as has been well-documented on here, I am clearly no fan of Tyson. You'll notice that Dempsey is one name that finishes lower and lower on all-time great lists as the years go by... except by fellas who are about 100 years old and were awed by him in the 1920s- and midgets. :good

 

I am in no doubt that Lewis was an all time great and top 10 all time heavyweight.

He was none the less beatable by other top 10 heavyweights including some that were under the cruiserweight limit. Remember we are talking about the real maestros of heavyweight boxing here.

Joe Louis is an obvious example of a heavyweight under 200lbs who could beat anybody because his asets were so comprehensive. Would you honestly put down money against Louis beating anybody?

Even if we go smaller we still find fighters who not only have the punching prowes to take him out quickly but the mobility to implement it. I am not just talking about Dempsey. I would honestly give Sam Langford a good shot at knocking out Lewis.

 

Could it be that the midgets who actualy saw him fight are dying off?

As the years go by people become less able to acurately asess him because there are less people who have seen him or fought him.

You should not hold it as any vindication that this limited stock concour with your revisionis theories.

 

I agree,

Even a 35 year old Tyson was still demolishing full sized modern heavyweights in Andrew Golata, Lou Savarese and Frans Botha. Not to mention, took some of Lewis's better shots for at least 8 rounds and even rocked him at one point. I firmly believe that This was likely more than Dempsey would accomplish, and especially considering that he was done by age 32.

 

You always have to watch out for that with a trainer. That dosnt however mean you should ignore them entirley.

Arcel maintained that Dempsey, Louis and Ali were the three best heavyweights he had ever seen up untill his death.

While he declined to choose between them he said that Dempsey was the most complete of the three and the best ofensive puncher he had ever seen.

 

Could very well have been the case.

 

I thought i'd pick one where the little guy did well, I could have picked Monzon-Napoles and said "Here's what generally happens when good big un meets good little un'. :good