Who's The 3rd Greatest Heavy weight?

For me Ali is 1st then Louis, in third I’d place Foreman given his overall achievements

Olympic Gold Medalist
Second best Heavyweight of the 70’s the golden era
Competed successfully in the 90’s the second best era of boxing while being somehow slower than Joe Joyce
Oldest world heavyweight champion a record that probably will never be beaten

If you haven’t watched the recent movie about him check it out

 

why do you think Lewis fought better rivals? Was 2002 Tyson as good as 1988 Tyson? Was the 1999 Holyfield as good as the 1992 Holyfield? Kurwa, Marvis Frazier has fought better opponents than Lewis
.

 

People like you make the argument against themselves all on their very own.

The first day you were here, every single post mentioned Lewis. The second day you ramped up and slid thru the gears effortlessly into full attack mode. You've shown a scary dedication to your cause ever since

A vast piece of your existence in here centers around a compulsive need to bag him, at every opportunity. It's obsessiveness, it's compulsive, it's weird, mentally unhealthy and just downright bizarre.

You're not the first in here to dedicate much of their online life to hating a fighter, we've seen plenty. They stick out like the proverbial dog balls. There's been some real weirdo's that's for sure

Now it's perfectly reasonable to rank Lewis down the bottom of the ten, I've seen some good arguments made by very good posters. But when you run own spewing targeted spite and venom over a prolonged period of time, well, it's a truly tragic look.

 

I stopped reading when he said Marvis Frazier has fought better opponents than Lennox Lewis ? What has that got to do with anything I have no idea ? other than to throw shade at Lewis with a bizarre comparison.

You could list a journeyman who has fought better opponents than Lewis but what does that prove ? Absolutely nothing.

Lewis's resume is definitely amongst the top 5 for depth.

 

That's what i'm talking about. Most in here see these "types" coming a mile away.

 

Holmes had longevity, Lewis had a tougher era. It would be similar comparing Wladimir to guys like Usyk/Frazier/Liston. You could make an argument either way.
The only knock against Lewis is that he didn't fight everyone in their prime. But that isnt Lewis's fault. Bowe ducked him in '93, Tyson ducked him in '96, and Holyfield didn't fight him till '99. The argument for Lewis I guess is that most would have picked him to beat them all IF they had fought closer to prime. But its not a gurantee. Thats why an argument can be made both ways.
And I wouldn't say Norton = Holyfield. That would be Foreman/Frazier. Norton would be more like Bowe level. If you want to compare their best wins it would be...
Norton vs Holyfield
Weaver/Shavers/Cooney/Mercer vs Ruddock/Golota/Tua/Vitali
And then you have Lewis's 2 one punch avenged KOs vs Holmes brutal (post prime) KO to Tyson and the decision loss to Spinks.
Almost dead equal.

 

noticed that if you start attacking someone personally and focus on him and not on his arguments, it means that you have no arguments of your own. This is usually the case not only in discussions about sports.
The fact that someone may not like me is no problem... But the fact that someone cannot answer substantively is pathetic.
What's the problem?.

1.What are Lewis' best fights/victories? Which of his victories are better than Holmes's? Which Lewis fight was better than Holmes-Norton?

2. Who has the better record?

3. Who has worse losses?

3. Who had a more long-lasting sports career?

4. Were Lewis's best opponents really better than Holmes's best opponents? Is Tyson 2002 better than Tyson 1988? is Holy 1999 better than Holy 1992?

5 Are we completely disregarding how prime Lewis looked compared to the same rivals as oast prime, over 40-year-old Holmes? Mercer, Holyfield, McCall?? Have you watched these fights?

 

Ok, thanks for your reply. And I respect that, not the idiotic posting of smiling faces of someone who has nothing to say about boxing but has a lot to say about me

Your arguments are ok, but they still do not exhaust the topic. In fact, given this way of looking at things - taking the best and not looking at the whole - Foreman's best victories are better than Holmes' best victories (Frazier, Norton). The only defeats he suffered in the prime were against ATG fighters (Ali, Young), they were against fighters that were terrible for him in terms of style and they were very good fights. But the same goes for Liston, Frazier, Tunney, Norton, Bowe - each of them had at least one or two better victories than Norton in 1978, at least in theory. But which of them lost in prime time like Lewis did to McCall or Rahman? Is Rahman's brutal beating proof of greatness? didn't Oleg Maskayev do it? John Ruiz? don't they have a better record with Rahman?

And no, I wouldn't say that Lewis retaliated with two brutal blows. Ko with Rahman was beautiful, but Lewis was a ko artist, Lewis himself said it was the best performance in his career, but who is Rahman? I didn't see any devastating blow with McCall, in the Best in Faced series Oliver said that his best rival in his career was... oh ****, not Lennox but. one guy who was 45 years old, hard to believe!

 

This content is protected

Why would i waste time? Why would i give you a platform to whine away with your disingenuous well rehearsed swiss cheese basement level attacks? It's obvious how highly regarded Lewis is held by the majority, it's right here in this very thread. It's always Lewis and Holmes in here for #3, overwhelmingly. Either can be picked without any big counter argument as both can easily fit the spot. Other names get mentioned, and aren't out of the question either.

You're the only one in here crying into his coffee all butt hurt because Lewis is getting a good share of mentions. No-ones going to take any notice of your shallow arguments and obvious motives. The vast majority in here who don't give Lewis much consideration for #3 have their own unbiased reasons based on criteria important to themselves. That's to be respected. You're a long way from that boat. I'm never going to change your mind, and your obvious emotional based rants about Lewis aren't going to change anyone else's mind either. Why would i need to waste my time going back and forth with you when i could be watching Lewis obliterating multiple contenders?

 

Rocco Francis Marchegiano

 

3. Holmes
4. Lewis
5. Marciano

I can see these 3 in any order, very little separates them, imo.

 

Thanks. Yes I mostly agree with you.
In response to your first point.. because Foreman, Liston, Frazier, Tunney etc never dominated their era. They were the #2/3/4 etc of their era. Holmes and Lewis are both the consensus #1 guy of their era.
Your second point.. well honestly for some reason Lewis gets a free pass for his losses, because they 'weren't meant to happen'. It was just a mistake that he fixed, rather than them being 'better' than him. I can really compare little nuances like that to Holmes era, because I didn't live through that time. So I'm only going by reading and videos. Only someone who lived through both their eras can truly say for sure.
But definitely the losses is one extra point Against Lewis.
But.. I can raise one more point For Lewis. His win over Vitali. The Klitschko's would go on to dominate the next two decades. Lewis basically indirectly showed he is the best heavyweight up until possibly Usyk. Thats huge.

 

I see some inconsistency in this logic. If the measure of value is absolute being No. 1 of his era, then Holmes was there for about 7 years, Ali similarly, Louis for at least 10 years... do we have the top three? No, there is also Wlad, better than Marciano, than Bowe and Holyfield, .much higher than Norton and Foreman ..and Lennox? this is a maximum of 5 years in which, for example, 2001 was 1-1 with Rahman, 2002 was the clinching of the hopeless Tyson, he really did not look like one of the greatest in history in these fights. Very weak control.
If defeats like Lewis's against Rahman and McCall don't indicate weakness, what does? I don't think Lewis took the first one lightly. What about Mercer? Lewis gave him the best he had!!

What are Lewis' greatest victories that ennoble him to be one of the greatest?
Vitali is ok, but hasn't he sometimes shown more that he is long-lived than that he has ever risen to a sky-high level? If Lewis was even better, hit him even harder, hurt him even more and ended Vitalij's career, would we value it so much? in one sentence - Lewis beating Vitalij harder would historically be rated worse, isn't it a paradox?

 

Holmes or Wlad. Long dominant reigns by both men. 7 years and 20 defenses for one guy and 11 years 18 defense for the other guy, both of them fighting in the modern era.

As for Lewis he tends to get slightly overrated. If he didn’t scrape out the Vitali win, I would view him more as a bridge champion from end of the American dominant heavyweight scene to the emerging Eastern European dominance of the division.
Unfortunately and not his fault he missed his chief rival In Riddick Bowe in the early mid 90s. By time Lewis hit his stride the big names were all incredibly shop worn or completely shot. He couldn’t drop or stop Holyfield in 24 rounds, a Holyfield that already lost 2 of 3 to Bowe and would never achieve a significant win post Lewis. In fact Holy probably lost his very next fight to Ruiz - exposing the level he was at by that point.
Tyson was beyond shot, I don’t believe he ever recaptured his form post prison and his heart was no longer in the game. By time he fought Botha in 97 he looked like a ghost of a fighter and Lewis didn’t get him until another half decade later.
Lewis with his size advantage feasted on fellow sluggers of the era but he didn’t face many boxer mover types nor any southpaws. He makes my top 10 but he isn’t the 3rd spot for sure.