Who is greater, Wlad or Lewis?

lewis had more to his game, a better fighter. better resume.

 

Look, I think i've made it clear that Tony Thompson was certainly as credible as (or more credible than) several of Lewis's challengers (Phil Jackson, Frans Botha, Zelkjo Mavrovic).

For you to suggest or imply that Phil Jackson or Zelkjo Mavrovic had anything in their records that put them on even a slight level about Thompson is ridiculous. In fact Thompson had somewhat superior credentials, with wins over Krasniqi, T.Ibragimov, V.Bean WAY better than anything Phil Jackson could muster, and better than Mavrovic's resume too.

Defending Phil Jackson's record in any rational way will be impossible for you. It just shows how far invested you are in the agenda to puff up Lewis while putting down Wlad for you to make any statement on Phil Jackson's opposition compared to Thompson's.

And if Lennox Lewis had held his titles for as long and as many defences as Wlad did perhaps he would have been ordered to defend against a repeat mandatory too. (Instead, at the same stage of his career/reign, he managed to get two fights out of Hasim Rahman by getting sparked by him.)

 

Lewis all day baby.

 

Lewis beat some better opponents, had fewer losses and avenged each of his two defeats. I think that overtakes Wlad's longevity. As it stands I have Lennox right around #5 and Wlad somewhere around #9-#10.

 

Phil Jackson : [url]http://boxrec.com/boxer/5724[/url]

Tony Thompson: [url]http://boxrec.com/boxer/21633[/url]

 

*cough*cough*

[url]http://boxrec.com/show/8869[/url]

Nudge nudge wink wink

 

its a shame that anyone who disagrees with you sets you off on a se.xually themed rant.

 

A meaningless win on Wladimir's record.
Phil Jackson was quite dreadful his whole career really, and just a tomato can by the time he faced Wladimir.

To be fair to Phil Jackson, we'll stick to his glorious prime when he was being battered by Ruddock and Lewis and beating guys like ...... errr .... duh .... umm ...mmm ... err

 

Just you and your wankstain Dino

 

I agree with your post. But certain people don't mind bigging up the shot and sliding versions of "names".

To Jackson's credit I think he managed to beat Olian Alexander?

 

I never listed Mavrovic as a credible opponent. But, for the sake of completeness, at least he was the European champ, in his prime and wasn't rematched at a later date.

Clearly, you think because a name is recognizable, that the boxer behind that name is of note. Mentioning 'Price' is worthy of a real good laugh, as is, to a lesser extent, 'Solis' who was a fringe contender, at best - and I am being kind.

Timur Ibragimov - That name appears to be the reason a few of Wlad's opponents get their shot. However, I have genuinely no idea the reason why that is.

Beating Bean, so long after having any relevancy, shouldn't be adding weight to one getting a title shot. Chazz Witherspoon is probably your best shout but, I don't think he was particularly high in the rankings.

 

About how I see it. But let's keep in mind Wlad has 68 fights as a pro. Lewis only had 44.

It Lewis fought 24 more times, it is likely he has 1-2 more KO losses.

 

If he'd rematched Vitali you can +1 KO loss for sure

 

Good grief. On the Troll a bit today, are we?

A very poor showing from you on here, BCS8.

You make some big deal out of Wlad's TKO win over a 41 year old Mercer; get called out on it; make some half-ar5ed and failed attempt at trying to compare Wlad/Mercer with a series of Lewis opponents and then finally admit that you think "Lewis Mercer > Wlad Mercer", which you hadn't done to me directly, until your post above.

Why go on and show yourself up by completely re-framing my original point for the second time?

There was really no need and it only makes you look ignorant.

 

doing it again.

double proof, thx.