I'd say Holmes in terms of greatness. racking up 48 straight wins is no easy feat. getting up after being rocked by earnie shavers and winning is no walk in the park either but head to head, a prime holmes vs prime lewis, i'd pick on lewis to win though
What are you talking about, Holmes didn't dominate the division at all post-82. Witherspoon was seen as a soft touch, lucky to get the decision over Snipes and only 15 fights, then he gives Holmes heaps of trouble, on my scorecard drawing with him, many had him winning..... what did Holmes and "iron" fist do? Decline and run from the 16 fight green challenger and never give him a well-earned rematch despite remaining on a winning streak.... that is not a true champion. Nevermind that he didn't give Norton a rematch either (very close fight despite Norton being half-retired), he didn't give the truth Williams a rematch (most had Holmes losing), he never faced Thomas who was definitely deserving a title shot between 83 and 85, he dropped his ONLY belt to avoid the mandatory Greg Page. You gotta remember that when this happened, the IBF title meant as much as the WBU title does today. Holmes was stripped of his WBC title but for some reason was gifted the IBF title. I don't think it's wrong per-se to drop your title if there's a ridiculous mandatory and you have bigger business, like Lewis dropping his title to not face Byrd but make a legacy fight with Tyson.. but what did Holmes do? He avoided Page who deserved a shot, to face the marvelous.......... 10 fight experience....... Marvin Frazier....... who lasted one? or two rounds. What a joke of a champion. And then there are the challengers named Michael Dokes and Gerry Coetzee that he avoided, as well as a Weaver rematch. Weaver was in a similar or worse situation as Witherspoon: he had a journeyman's record going in (19-8), but gave Holmes a very tough fight and improved, but of course was never going to be granted a rematch. So that's 7 very deserving fights that he refused to make. That's too unchampionship-like for my taste. I can understand if he only made 3 or 4 of those fights, but none of all 7?? Come on. At least Lewis fought everyone at any time, when he wasn't ducked himself.
Holmes would have been counted out and stopped against Shavers and snipes by the same ref that stopped Lewis against Mccall, Lewis was on his feet at 6. Holmes didnt regain his balance by the count of 10, in fact the refs didnt even bother taking his hands and looking in his eyes, modern refs wouldnt be so lax. Although Cortez is always prone to give fighters 17, 18 seconds before restarting the fight!
Holmes is overrated for his longevity, but whats the purpose of longevity if other fighters beat a better group of fighters within a shorter period of time?
I don't think Holmes has any business being anywhere in the top 3 or even top 5 for that matter. His "defenses" against guys with 14-8-3 records are laughable.
Head to Head I think Lewis would knockout Holmes ... He fought bums until he met Tyson. You can't deny the title defenses but Lewis was on a different level as far as competition. Lewis also beat every man he's faced in the ring (by way of rematch)
I love how people minimize fighters to being just bums because they're not familar with them. Lennox definitely has his share of guys that were average on his resume. Francois Botha Shannon Briggs (6 round fighter) Michael Grant Zeliko Marajovic Hepititas Henry Hasim Raham
This is one of the thoughest H2H to call imo; both guys sort of cancelling each other out. Holmes was a better technician with a slightly better jab, and tougher. Lewis a little bigger and stronger with more power. I lean slightly toards Lewis, not sure why...