The HW division today is as weak as it was in the Lennox Lewis era?

I think Victor should not have did the jumping billy goat headbutt . . . oh **** not back to this stupid ****!:dead

 

I don't even think these guys were world beaters in their day (hello cocaine, thanks for **** all), but guys like Pinklon Thomas, Witherspoon, Tony Tucker, Dokes etc, all had reasonable skills, one or two good attributes, and mostly showed up in shape.

Even the guys that were considered fat back then, were gym rats compared to half of todays fighters.

 

:good So true today heavyweights arent even fit, Chambers is fat with 95 kgs or something like that how the hell does he accompish that

 

of course we are talking about the era when 40+ Foreman came back from retirement, beat a bunch of cans and won 2 belts.

 

Klitschkos would have dominated in any ear!!!!!!!

 

the question really is: was time in or not? if it was then . . . opps I am in this garbage thread again, excuse me while i take a nap

 

Yes.

What parts would you like me to add for you?

That it was a superbly managed career where George steered clear of the big guns unless a title shot was involved? That he lost to tommy morrison?

He was being outboxed and landed a good shot on a chinny former LHW?

That he flat out refused to fight Lennox Lewis, and even admitted it at the time?

That besides all that, it was George Foreman winning a belt at that age, and not Oleg Maskaev or Shannon Briggs? (who did manage to beat you know who back then....)

The real difference between then and now is simple.

If you remove Wlad and Vitaly from todays division, and removed Lewis/Holy/Tyson from their era, the last era was much, much stronger.

There was Bowe for a start (so, remove him and you've already got twice as many 'elite' guys as there are now), and then the next tier down.

The 'almost' world class guys of back then were streets of ahead of the 'almost' top guys now.

Golota, Ruddock, Tua, Ike, Moorer (i was never sold on him to be honest), Mercer, Tony Tucker, Thomas, Dokes, Witherspoon, McCall, Bruno


or

Povetkin, Adamek, Haye, Kingpin Johnson, Calvin Brock, tony thomson, Eddie Chambers, Peter, Arreola


I'll take the older guys anyday. And that's leaving out guys like Corrie Sanders, Hasim Rahman, Oleg Maskaev that were/are still competing better in their old age then their prime due to weakened competition.

 

The same Holyfield who had 2 wins over Tyson? Wins over Bowe, Foreman, Mercer, Buster Douglas, Holmes? atsch

The same Moore who has wins over Holyfield and Botha? atsch

Please, the two do not even compare! Haye and Adamek between them have wins over Barrett, Valuev and a one armed Arreola!

Back to the TS, question. I'm sure an Old Rahman was better then the 1 Lewis destroyed in 4, I'm sure an Old Briggs (who took Vitali the distance) was better than the younger 1 Lewis destroyed in 5. And I'm sure fighters like Arreola, Kevin Johnson, Solis, Peter, Williams, 'Fast Eddie' and Chageav, were all better than Holyfield, Moore, Tyson, Tua, Botha, Bowe, Golota, Mercer, Tommy Morrison, Bruno, Tony Tucker, Ruddick, Ike. Come on, the era's aint even close. Then throw in the fact that 1 of the guys who has dominated the division for the last 10 years was stopped in 6 by an OLD Lewis, proves how weak the division now is compared to Lennox's era.

 

My God!

 

If two CW's in the top 5 bother you, what does it say about a LHW being champ during Lewis' era? And then being K0'd by a guy with multiple grandchildren?

I rate Lennox Lewis very highly but this comparing of eras gets out of hand. Joe Louis only fought 17 HW's in his entire career, the rest were CW's or LHW's by today's standards, yet the current era gets **** for a few CW's moving up to HW? What about Braddock, Marciano, Patterson, Moorer as champs?

A big unknown is also how good some fighters could have been, had their careers not been derailed by facing a Klitschko, or Lennox in his era. Maybe Michael Grant would have been competitve with lighter punching champs of the past? Maybe Chambers could have been given Larry Holmes a competitive fight? Axel Schulz would never have been a world beater, but he held his own against Foreman and Moorer and was beaten into retirement by Wlad.

 

Not this **** again. atsch Quite clearly if anyone thinks this era is '****' is without doubt some sort of ****, plain and simple.

Vitali Klitschko
Wlad Klitschko
Byrd
Peter
Chagaev
Haye
Solis
Brock
Helenius
Valuev
Toney
Povetkin
Adamek
Ibragimov
Brewster
Sanders
Thompson
Chambers
Juan Carlos Gomez
Ustinov

The older fighters fighting at a high level past their best.
Rahman
Briggs

The next batch of dangerous young fighters.
Boystov
Fury
Price
Gerber
Perez
Dimitrenko


If anybody thinks at least 50% of these names mentioned couldn't win a World title in a weaker era than this one then they must be on heroin or something. Yes true, some of these names may never match what ATG fighters like Henry Cooper achieved but to call the above '****' really just goes to show you don't even watch the division.

 

:fire:fire:fire:fire:fire Read my other posts.

CW Holyfield and LHW Moore have very good wins at HW! Adamek and Haye dont! It's that simple!

 

This content is protected

 

Just look at the last 2 challengers, Haye and Adamek, the top 2 contenders in recent times.
I'd feel sorry for those guys. To place 3rd and 4th in the 90's they'd have to get past the likes of Ruddock, Ike, Mercer, Morrison, Golota, Bowe, Holyfield, Tyson, Bruno, Lewis, Foreman, Moorer, Witherspoon, Tucker, Briggs, Holmes, Tua, etc.
They'd barely make top 10 material, so yes Lewis's era was superior.

Here endeth thy lesson.

 

todays heavyweight division sucks only got boytsov as a real competitor to the klitschko's, plus vitali is from lennox's cloth so aint nobody beating the klitschko's soon.