Who is greater, Wlad or Lewis?

Mercer was 41 years old , whereas for Lewis he was 35. I'd say that is significant.

 

Dino at his usual game. Keep walking.

 

I agree that the Mercer Wlad fought < the Mercer Lewis fought.

However, if certain posters want to completely write off wins because fighters had been beaten before, then Lewis comes out way worse in this particular little game. Lewis has the names on his resume, but one could also argue that most of the 'name' fighters he fought were well on the slide by that time. Wlad on the other hand has FAR more cherries popped on his resume as well as beating down fighters with single losses prior.

To me the Vitali win is what makes Lewis' resume greater.

If he didn't have that one then I'd take Klitscko.

 

Mercer was 41 years old , whereas for Lewis he was 35. I'd say that is significant.

The fact that Lewis avenged his 2 losses is also a big factor for me.

 

Vitali isn't even his best win.
Tyson
Holyfield
Briggs
Morrison
Tua
Merovic
Golota
Bruno
All better names. . And on top of it Lewis din't go life and death with Tua like Wlad did with Peter and Tua was better than Peter.

Lets go back to Mercer for a min.

Wlad defending against Mercer is the same as Wilder defending against Shannon Briggs right now. If Wilder made that fight he'd be thrown out of the sport.
Yet you sit there and pretend like Wlad done a better job on Ray then Lewis did and praise Wlad for his performance. Bottom level standards.
Its the same as some fool saying Wilder beat Briggs better than Lewis if he made that fight and stopped him in one round.

I already know what your response will be so i'll save you the effort..

But Wilder did his best to fight Briggs and one touch from Briggs would leave Wilder in a slop. Wilder would never fight Briggs ... blah blah blah

 

Actually scrub Wilder.. Its worse than Joshua facing Briggs since Wlad was a 40 fight seasoned pro when he plucked Mercer out of obscurity in run down casinos in the back end of nowhere

As far as im aware his bouts weren't even televised.

 

anyone competent would have destoryed that version. we are talking a 40something.

 

vitali doesnt make lewis top 5 opponents. koing prime vits inside 6 when in his worst shape ever was his real retirement fight, no way that can be a top opponent.

 

No he wasn't on a decent win streak. Who had he beaten?
In any event, it doesn't change the fact that he was 41 and somehow got a shot at Wlad's Title.

It's not the same logic and you know that.

Why would I scratch Holyfield off the Lewis resume? Last time I looked, long-dead kills weren't 36-year-old, #1 ring-ranked, unified champions, who had, not that long ago, twice-beaten tyson and avenged their loss to the only other man to have beaten them, on their way to attempting to become the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world.

Same goes for a 20-something Golota - a hot head, who'd only ever been disqualified, in the course of slapping Bowe about, twice on the bounce.

The McCall return was for the Vacant WBC Title. Lewis didn't choose the opponent. McCall was still ranked by the WBC; was still in his 30's and had at least been fighting Live bodies.
The circumstances of the fight; that it regained Lewis the title and avenged his first lost can't really be held against him. It had to be done.

Bruno was 31 years old; considered a legitimate domestic rival and ring-rated.


Klitschko was already a Titlist. Mercer was 41; not ring-rated; had not beaten anyone of consequence and somehow got offered a shot at Wlad's Title.

 

Lewis and it is not even close.

Lewis is arguably top 5 both h2h and resume.
Guys that he beat like tyson, holyfield, mercer, morrison, ruddock etc would have probably beat wlad.

 

Exactly.
..... McCall, Bruno, Biggs, Akinwande, shot Tucker, shot Tyson, Mavrovic, Tua, Mercer, Phil Jackson, Golota ...... those are the exact same level of opponents as Chagaev, Byrd, Povetkin, Thompson, Ibragimov, Haye, S.Peter.

Holyfield's the main case for Lewis's superior opposition, and Holyfield was well-worn at 36/37 years old.

 

Tony Thompson didn’t even start his pro career until aged 28, in the year 2000. In 30 bouts he fights no one near being recognized as a top-10 heavyweight but gets a title shot at 36 years old, anyway.

This isn’t so bad but, after being KO’d in round 11 by Wlad, I neither see why a rematch was necessary not why it needed to happen 4 years later when Thompson was rapidly approaching his 41st birthday and, once again, hadn’t beaten anyone of note to deserve a shot.

Thompson would have been fodder in the previous era. I doubt he'd have ever earned a title shot.

 

I don't need to read any further. You're a straight up asshat.

 

Oh, look, Dino and Herol are sucking each other off again on their anti-Klitschko crusade. Moving on ...

 

It's all here:

http://boxrec.com/boxer/1620

7 wins on the trot, another 4 after the Klitschko loss.

It's exactly the same logic.

Because shooting arrows at the long-dead kill of a prior huntsman, is hardly worthy of credit, let alone an enthusiastic claim to bragging rights.

Bowe is that huntsman.

Your desperate defence of Lewis' other victims in no way changes that:

a) They were NOT prime versions
b) They had suffered bad beatings before that
c) In some cases were mentally unstable and should have been nowhere near a ring (McCall)
d) In Vitali's case, he actually quit the sport rather than face him again. He also never faced Mercer, who gave him a real hard fight, again. Pretty cowardly.
e) In Mercer's case, Lewis faced him after he had had a very tough bout, losing against Holyfield.

Your attempts to dismiss one win while ignoring the same faults in Lewis' wins leave me in no doubt of your hypocrisy here.

Frankly you should have taken Lewis > Wlad's resume when I first posted it, and ran.

His careful picking of diminished versions of "name" opponents reduces the value of those wins.