Was Lewis-Holyfield l a screw job?

This weakens his position dramatically.

 

in boxing yes we seen much the worse.
but is bad decision. Lewis was win it
draw no. that is not give Lewis credit enough
for what he did in ring

 

I scored it for Lennox but it was n't as lopsided as has been painted.

Lennox by two/three points.

 

There was something not right about the scoring.

Draws in unification fights suit the promoters & the sanctioning bodies. In the event of a draw the titls mremain split so promoters can still sell 2 title fights, one for each belt.

The sanctioning bodies have more title fights to sell so they get more sanctioning fees.

Promoters can sell the rematch and can use the controversy of a drawn first fight to stir up interest in a rematch, the controversy of the drawn first fight is a big selling point in a rematch.

 

You didn't watch a round of the fight did you?

 

Lewis won a very easy to score 117-111 on my card. I’ve watched it three times. It’s always been the same for me. The rematch was a round or two closer, but I’d say all the rounds were more competitive.

 

I saw those fights the same way. Lewis methodically outboxed Holyfield in the first match. The Big Dog shut down Evander's offense while doing all the scoring from the outside. The criticism you can put on Lewis was he wasn't punching with serious or bad intentions the way he was capable. He was pecking and poking a little bit. Punching at the target instead through the target. At that time the American media would grasp onto anything to shi! On Lennox Lewis to justify a robbery. Lennox Lewis dominated the fight. Whether it was exciting is irrelevant.

2nd fight was better. Evander Holyfield was a great competitor and he proved it on this night. Holyfield made some adjustments that helped him nullify Lewis jab. As I recall Holyfield came on mid to late to pretty much pull even on my card but the Big Dog had one more trick up his sleeve, a right uppercut that took the starch out of Evander in the later rounds. Lennox took the momentum back and won it close but clear.

 

Having seen the title of this thread I decided to go watch this fight. I've never seen it before and this was a truly horrible decision. I scored the fight 118-111 and, at best, I could see Holyfield losing 116-112. @ChrisJS said this fight was very easy to score and I agree. I actually had that thought a couple of times while watching the bout. There were very few close rounds and certainly not enough close rounds to give Holyfield a draw.

I don't believe there was a fix or anything like that. It was just truly bad scoring.

 

Lewis trunks/protective gear were so high it was absurd. It literally took away Holyfield's opportunity to work the body. So, for that reason alone, I am glad Lewis had to settle for a DRAW.

 

Going off the actual scoring criteria it was a close fight. All three judges had it as a very close fight or a draw, which it was. Also, Lennox's jab didn't stop Holyfield's effective aggression (actually part of scoring) throughout the rounds. On that alone Lennox clearly didn't dominate the fight. In several rounds Holyfield arguably landed the cleaner punches, so once again Lennox didn't dominate the fight.

Lennox had himself to blame for not winning, not the judges. I remember watching the fight when it happened and laughing at Lennox whining after the fight, since Steward was begging him the whole fight to show more dominance, but Lennox wouldn't listen.

What a guy looks like or sounds like after the fight doesn't matter. All that matters is how effective he is during the fight, since Frazier looked and sounded much worse compared to Ali after the FOTC, but clearly defeated Ali.

For your convenience I posted the scoring criteria below.

Scoring criteria
The scoring shall be done on a TEN POINT must system. Judges are to score each round using
the following scoring criteria:
1. Clean punching (power versus quantity).
2. Effective aggressiveness.
3. Ring generalship.
4. Defense.
https://www.bcathleticcommission.ca...-47ab-940e-b3e58103ffc1/ABC-Boxing-Rules.aspx

 

Great post. And true. Lewis never dominated Holyfield. Refused to capitalise. The fight was to decide who the best heavyweight was. They both sat back too much.

 

You keep missing the point, yes Lennox Lewis didn't beat Evander Holyfield to a bloody pulp. but you can still dominate the fight tactically, without really punishing your opponent. Kind of like Bivol did to Canelo recently, and no in none of the criteria's is this a "close fight" and that argument has been rebutted in my post below.

The fact is Lewis tactically dominated Holyfield at range with the jab, which limited Holyfield's to only 30 punches a round. Which is an abysmal output so where is this effective aggression you keep claiming ? And your saying Holyfield "Landed cleaner punches in some of the rounds" but yet the stats don't back up your argument. Lewis landed 348 punches with an overall percentage of 58 percent, and Holyfield landed 130 punches with an overall percentage of 34 percent.

In most peoples eyes Lewis won 8-9 rounds fairly convincingly in this fight, you don't have to beat the other man to a pulp. You can tactically dominate the fight and still deserve to win a clear wide decision. Yes i agree Lewis at times maybe could of upped the pace here and there, but that still doesn't mean he shouldn't win a fair decision. Lewis did what he needed to do, control the smaller man at range with the jab, and not allow Holyfield to get anything going.

Of course it matters what ? just because it doesn't fit with your narrative your dismissing it. Most boxers have a tremendous ego, which they use to have that self belief that they're the best. Holyfield when the bell rung looked like a loser in the face, and in the interview after couldn't even justify the draw himself, how many fighters after a decision couldn't justify a decision ? even when they straight up lie ? not even Holyfield could conjure that one up in the interview after, he was so embarrassed by the decision.

Also one more thing i'd like to point out to you aswell, do you know Holyfield has had several interviews in the past few years regarding Lewis vs Holyfield 1 ? do you know what he said about it ? he said he felt like quitting in the fight, and it was only seeing his son in the crowd that stopped him from quitting. Because he didn't want people coming up to his son calling his dad a quitter.

So your the one trying to convince me and others in this thread, that Lewis didn't dominate Holyfield and it's a competitive fight. And on the other hand you've got the actual fighter "Holyfield" who has said himself he felt like quitting during the fight, so what does that tell you ? doesn't that conflict with your argument ? that the actual fighter himself, has admitted that he was so disheartened in the fight that he felt like quitting ? does that sound like a "competitive fight" to you ?

Yes i'm well aware of what boxing is scored on, and where does Holyfield win in any of these categories ?

Clean Punching ? Power ? = Clearly Lewis he landed at a higher percentage, and landed more power punches 161 to 78 in favour of Lewis
Effective Aggressiveness = Well clearly not Holyfield he was controlled at range all night with the jab, and was never able to really get any aggression going apart from 3rd round.
Ring Generalship = Clearly Lewis he controlled the action in the centre of the ring with his jab.
Defense = Again clearly Lewis, Holyfield landed at a much lower percentage despite throwing 200+ less punches than Lewis.

Lastly again lets see your scorecard.

 

Lewis sat back far too much in the first fight after he had things in control.

My gripe is that in both fights neither man fought enough like a challenger wanting to take something. They both fought like they were only defending a title and would be given the benefit of doubt. The vacant undisputed title was up for grabs here!

It’s not the way Ali and Frazier went about their business in 1971.

 

Its irrelevant whether or not both men went at it like hammer & tongs. The fact is Lewis dominated a tactical fight, and was a deserved clear winner. You just said yourself Lewis was in control, whether or not Lewis should of pressed the action a bit more. And tried for a stoppage has nothing to do with this debate.

Were debating whether or not Lewis clearly won the fight, and I've put forward statistics proving Lewis's dominance. Aswell as Holyfield admitting himself, he felt like quitting in the fight because he was so disheartened, so that pretty much tells you how "competitive" Holyfield thought the fight was.

I don't see what else needs to be said, I shouldn't even need the evidence. It's clear with your own eyes Lewis tactically dominated the fight with his jab, as Holyfield was frustrated and disheartened and could only conjure up 30 punches a round, he was well beaten simple as that.

 

My score card for the second fight it I had Lewis winning 1, 2, 4, 9,10 and 11.

Round 5 I gave to Holyfield but that was the only round out of all of them I felt could have also given to Lewis..

I had Holyfield winning 3,5, 6,7,8 and 12.

The pattern of the fight Lewis was ahead over the first 5 rounds to begin with. Holyfield came back and was one point up by round 7 only for it to level up by round 10.

I had it going all on the last two rounds but i gave them one each. There was nothing in it.

Lewis was sloppy.