Who Should the #3 Consensus Heavyweight of All Time Be?

Seems like a contradiction.

If you don't hold someone's losses against them outside of their prime ... then how do you rate someone's wins over people outside their prime "very highly?"

If you allow people like the 35-year-old Ali and the 35-year-old Holmes' a "free pass" for losses (for example to the Spinks brothers) outside their prime, why do people here put so much weight into a 35-year-old Lewis losing to Rahman? Lennox wasn't prime.

(Hell, Ali fought just as many times after losing to Leon as Lewis did after losing to Rahman. Holmes kept fighting and losing forever. And Rocky was long retired by then.)

The only person on that above list who catches hell for losing at the age of 35 is Lennox Lewis. And he practically tore the guy's head off in the rematch. (He didn't lose in the rematch like Holmes or clinch his way to a points win, like Ali. Rahman was flat out with blood running out of his mouth.)

I rate fighters based on their whole boxing careers.

Lewis beat better 'prime' heavyweights than Larry or Rocky did ... Vitali, Tua, Rahman, Golota, Briggs, Morrison, Ruddock, Bruno ...

Were the 'non-prime' Tyson and Holyfield better than Walcott, Charles and Moore ... or better than Holmes' non-prime names like Shavers, Ali and Norton? IMO, hell yes.

Lewis won the Gold Medal - Louis, Marciano and Holmes weren't top amateurs ... Ali was, but never beat anyone as good as Bowe in the Olympics.

Lewis had an amazing career, beating a Hall of Fame heavyweight in his last amateur win, beating a Hall of Fame heavyweight in his last pro win, and beating everyone he fought in between. Lewis made more than twice as many defenses as Marciano. Lewis beat better prime contenders and better past-prime fighters than Marciano.

In fact, other than Lennox Lewis, I don't think anyone on that list (Rocky and Holmes included) beats Vitali Klitschko in their last pro fight. But quite a few (if not all) take care of the Archie Moore who Marciano fought in his last bout.

Lewis had a career any heavyweight would love to have.

Anyway. That's all I've got.

Good topic.

 

Bowe did very little outside the Holyfield trilogy. Why would you think he could be compared with Lewis given his resume?

 

Dang bro you wrote me a novel lol. That's an awful lotta stuff to respond to:

1. I never said I don't hold past-prime losses against fighters, but we shouldn't forget context.

2. I don't think the guys that Lewis beat that you mentioned, like Tua, etc. are nearly as good as Moore, Walcott & Charles.

3. I have nothing against Lewis, you don't have to defend him to me. I can see him ranked as high as 5 or 6.

4. I don't consider amateur achievements when gauging a pro career.

 

You don't think Vitali Klitschko was tougher to beat than Archie Moore, Walcott or Charles? They had 40 losses between them by the time he got around to facing them. Charles lost two fights (to Johnson and Valdes) the year before he faced Marciano (and he had two losses the year before that - to Walcott and Layne).

Do you think Rocky Marciano beats Vitali Klitschko? Hell, do you think Rocky Marciano beats David Tua?

Because I do not.

 

Yeah I absolutely feel that they are better fighters. I understand that's not a popular pov with the giants around, but David slew Goliath lol.

 

I don't agree that Rocky beats Vitali or Tua. But that's cool.

Gotta go mow the grass again.

Peace.

 

Lewis or Holmes for me. Both on resume and H2H ability.