Who ranks higher as a heavyweight, Larry Holmes or Lennox Lewis?

The cards were narrower than they should have been, IMO. Both Holmes and Lewis beat Norton and Holyfield clearly.

As for weak performances, Witherspoon and Williams are better examples.

 

For me clearly Holmes, as it comes to legacy. For many reasons:

1. Title Reign!!! 7 years, 20 defenses!
2. Holmes has fought nearly twice as many fights as Lewis...with a pro career lenght of nearly 30 years!
3. He fought guys wich gave trouble to Lewis, in his 40s!!! And he was very competitive! (Mercer, McCall, Holyfield)
4. When it comes to competition during the title reign...for me its pretty much even.

Holmes
Level A: Norton, Weaver, Cooney, Witherspoon,
Level B: Smith, C. Williams, L. Spinks, Cobb, Shavers

Lewis
Level A: Mercer, Vitali,
Level B: Ruddock, Tucker, Bruno, Morrison, McCall, Golota, Holyfield (36/37y)

(lets don't talk about out of shape Tyson and old Ali)

 

McCall and Rahman could never have dropped Holmes.

 

And Holmes had much less power than Lewis.

Things like this are why I have such difficulty here.

 

Holmes by a small margin.

Lennox was a bigger, more powerful athlete. Those gifts were God given

Larry Holmes was a much better "fighter" than Lennox Lewis.

 

Larry had fast hands and fast feet when young, a good chin, great recovery powers, and whatever confluence of biomechanics that led to his jab. He had huge physical gifts too in his first career.

 

I dont see any case for Norton being Tier A and Holyfield for Tier B. Holyfield went on to log some good wins whereas Norton went on to get repeatedly knocked unconscious.

Weaver and Witherspoon weren't Tier A on account of being green. Weaver's resume was terrible at that point.

Ruddock and Golota were both regarded as major threats when Lewis fought them. You are discounting those wins because Lewis embarrassed them whereas you're elevating Holmes' win against Witherspoon for going down to the wire with a lightly regarded fighter.

Lewis's wins over Tua, Grant, Rahman and Briggs were also significant. And Tyson was a top five heavyweight when Lewis beat him up whereas Ali shouldn't have even be licensed for the Holmes fight.

Lewis also did something major that Holmes failed to even attempt which is unify.

 

holmes

 

Holmes... he also did better with Ray Mercer than Lennox

 

I thought he was more iconic and the era was deeper, yet I know people will say David Bey and Marvis Frazier deep? But he did fight tough guys, and Mike Weaver was no slouch.

 

Holmes for me, and my reasoning is relatively straightforward. There's not much between them in terms of opposition beaten, longevity at a world class / meaningful level (remembering that Holmes had a couple of retirements 1986-1991) or overall achievements.

The key difference is that Holmes wasn't twice removed from his titles by being one-punched into oblivion by divisional gatekeepers. I know, I know - it almost happened to Holmes, and it can potentially happen to anyone. But ultimately it didn't happen to Holmes, or just anyone. It happened to Lewis....Twice. Makes it a fairly straightforward decision for me albeit Lewis isn't too many spots behind.

 

Lewis shades it for me. It's always a close vote and there's no wrong answer.

 

They are both top five .. Lewis is underrated by many which is absurd as he was terrific .. I favor Holmes .. tougher, more grit and the speed would make the difference ..

 

Only one of these is top 10 for me...
So they can't be compared in it, as one if actual outside.

 

Lol holmes resume its nothing special but nobody say anything because his name isn't Mike tyson