Was Holyfield robbed in his rematch with Lennox Lewis?

@choklab

it was an unpopular decision, I will give you that. maybe you are too young to remember, some boxing people did make it a draw. The mainstream press ran with the bigger story of it being a scandal and the woman judge scoring Lewis’s biggest round for Evander and the overall punch stats being much higher for Lewis. But both factors don’t really make a controversy. You can win a round by one punch and lose a round by 100 punches.

My response: I was an adult male when the first and second fights happened. They were a very big deal to me and I scored both fights and followed the coverage closely.

Also I dont need an explanation on scoring a round either mate.

obviously Lewis doesn’t have to win every single round. But he did not show enough aggression in at least 7rounds which on some cards can conceivably make it a draw. As you know I did have Lewis winning six rounds to four with 2 even in the first fight. He just left far too many rounds open to interpretation when you consider the dominance he was able to show in some moments. The undisputed championship was on the line after all.

Response: You just have to win the rounds, the same rules of scoring a fight applies. You dont need to win every round big in order to win an undisputed championship.
It wasnt a difficult fight to score either pal. Holyfield won 2 rounds clearly. Lewis won the other 10 rounds, some of those rounds were close and some were clear.

maybe you don’t remember. It wasn’t popular. But it was no landslide.

Response: Every single boxing journalist who scored the fight scored it for Lewis WIDE. There was a big controversy in the UK media where I am from. It was universally accepted that a REMATCH must happen to right the robbery of the first fight. Even the US journalists agreed to that.

yes the consensus among mainstream media was Lewis was robbed. Boxing people also mostly thought Lewis had “done enough”. But it wasn’t some hysterical outrageous thing.

Response: So you now admit the media considered it was a ROBBERY, but not among "boxing people". Yes it was considered a robbery even on online forums. I was on the forums at the time.

I shall review it. At the time I thought Evander did slightly more than Lewis but I couldn’t really blame anyone for choosing Lewis. Both decisions were not really enough to take somebody’s title away. The two fights were disappointing really

Response: Yet again you dont need to win every round clear just to take a title from someone. You just need to win the rounds. You score each round and then at the end of it add the rounds up to see who has won.

Also had Lewis lost he would have lost his titles. So you are admitting here you favour Holyfield, as you are looking out to make sure he doesnt lose his title unless he loses the majority of rounds clear.

First fight was a wide UD for Lewis

Second fight was a UD for Lewis but closer than the first. From memory Holyfield had more success getting on the inside and landed some clear work Lewis. But Lewis did still dominate on the outside, and won the majority of the rounds. However he did find Holyfield difficult to deal with.

Neither fight was a classic we can atleast agree on that.

 

Yeah Holy winning a mere 2 rounds is laughable.

 

I agree with you. Even Harold Lederman gave Evander 3 rounds. I gave Holyfield 4 rounds with 2 even. It was a closer fight than people think.

 

• Seth Abraham, president of HBO Sports: "It's disappointing. It was such a wonderful promotion and to end like this. . . ."

• Jim Lampley, HBO commentator: "Lennox Lewis has just been robbed of the undisputed heavyweight championship of the world. He won it, and he didn't get it.

• Steve Farhood, Showtime boxing analyst: "I've been covering boxing twenty years. I would put this in the top five for the worst decisions I've seen."

• Frank Bruno, former WBC heavyweight champion: "The judges verdict was the most disgusting decision I've ever seen in boxing."

• Larry O'Connell, one of the three official judges, who scored the fight 115-115: "I feel sorry for myself. I've taken so much stick. But I feel even more sorry for Lennox."

• Rudolph Giuliani, New York City Mayor: "I am embarrassed as a New Yorker. I know boxing as well as I know being mayor. There’s no way that Holyfield won the fight. This is a travesty what happened

 

My debate with Choklob is about the first fight, which he claimed was close and implied could have been a draw. Simply ridiculous

 

I rewatched Lewis - Holyfield II yesterday. (This was only the only time I watched it since it took place).The viewing comfirmed my initial score that Holyfield should have gotten the nod.

 

I am still waiting for you to reply

 

Holyfeld won the last round (even though officially 2 judges found a way to give to lewis). In a close fight, that was the difference to me. Foreman was remarkably on point that night.He said that it was a close fight that could have gone either way. He also said that Holyfield likely would not get the decison because of what happened in the first fight.

Also Foreman called the fight itself just right. All those left jabs of Holyfield to the chest of Lewis were effective and lowered Lewis hands. Lennox had his lands way too low in that fight

 

I have just reviewed the second fight for the first time since the fight happened.

Lewis got off to a good start then faded badly and neglected his jab after round 6. Lewis looked a bit too bullied and tired in the second half of the fight -though he still able to win some of the rounds late on with with slightly more work.

Holyfield didn’t win anything or do much until the 3 round. But from then on Lewis just let Evander into the fight and it was harder for Lennox to stay on top. Evander was doing less but landing better blows and always coming forward.

Evander was able to thread his own jabs and counters coming in right through the middle of whatever Lewis was doing. pulling away when he Was tagged often gave Lewis the appearance of losing his balance. Initiating holding and pushing Evander away also hinted enough at desperation enough times to count against him in the scoring of rounds he might have won.

Lewis did hold his ground inside but I think he lacked the same precision as Holyfield. His feet looked heavy and he was unable to sit down enough on his punches. Concentrating on uppercuts I think Lewis actually created more openings for Holyfield, who wasn’t really doing much himself yet still appearing more organised and comfortable with the pace. Evander was not missing so much and making a greater impression with far less.

I had both winning 6 rounds each and I recommend anyone to score the rounds again before making judgement on this.

I am not so sure there is a strong argument for Holyfield winning this fight. Or for Lewis really.

Lewis never dominated anyone over the full 12 round distance. Lennox just was not a comfortable long distance fighter at all. Great fighter with every tool he just always faded and got sloppy late in a fight.

 

No I am biased in favour of a domination looking like a domination. A domination in 4 rounds is not winning a decision.

I had Lewis win the first fight but not by enough to get all hysterical about it if somebody saw it a draw. He beat up Evander on the rounds he clearly won. Morally he looks better for that reason. Evander did not win it. But that’s not the same as saying it was a domination for Lewis.

There was no domination anywhere in the second fight by either man. It was a tight fight with moments for either guy.

I always believed the non boxing mainstream media created most of the controversy of the first fight. They focused on the overall punches landed and the public bought into that. Lewis had the most dominant rounds by far. But unless he wins more than 6 clear dominating rounds it can still be a close fight. Lewis never won the same 6 rounds that everyone could universally agree upon. Never mind more than 6. And that was a career flaw with him. If the other six rounds are close or can go either way then it’s open to far too much interpretation.

boxing fans on forums have allegiances to the fighters they like. I know for a fact impartial boxing people with real credentials recognised that were grounds for these fights to be inconclusive. Lewis looked the better man but fights are scored round by round. Winning by a couple of rounds is not a domination if there are enough unclear rounds.

 

If I give all close rounds to Holyfield I still can't score him the second fight.

Interestingly Holyfield admitted he was going to quit in the first fight after he failed to ko Lewis in the 3rd round.

This content is protected

 

My advice is that you rewatch the 2nd fight witout bias. To me Holyfield is 0-1-1 against Lennox because neither the first nor the 2nd fight were scored fairly