Why didn't Lewis face Ruiz and Byrd?

My, and a reasonable, criteria for a champion not defending against a willing challenger, is that at least one of three criteria must be met:

1. Clear number 1 contender.
2. Biggest available purse.
3. Prevailing public opinion is the contender would win.

If 1 of these crtieria is met, it likely can be reasonably argued as a duck of sorts.

If 2 of the 3 criteria is met, its probably a duck.

If all 3 are met, it's almost certainly a blatant duck.

Byrd wasn't Lewis's number 1 contender. Wlad* was the #1 Ring ranked HW when Lewis fought Vitali.

A Byrd fight wouldn't have represented the highest purse available to Lewis (a Tyson rematch likely would), or second highest (Wlad likely would), or third highest, and so on.

There was no public interest in a Lewis vs Byrd fight. Had Lewis signed to defend vs Byrd he would have rightfully been a prohibitive favourite and likely would have faced criticism for his choice of challenger.

Signing to fight another contender who fails to meet any of these 3 criteria (in this case Johmson) doesn't constitute a duck of any other contenders who also fail to meet any of these 3 criteria, imo. No champion defends against every contender and as I said, ABC belts and their mandatories likely meant relatively little to Lewis at this point, money (mostly) and legacy (secondary) were likely his sole concerns.

Have you considered adding a poll to this thread? Even just for Byrd?

Incidentally a better argument could be made for Lewis ducking Wlad (I don't think he did) than Byrd. Wlad was the no.1 contender, after filming together on Oceans 11 it would have caught the public opinion more, the purse would have been higher and whilst I would favour Lewis, Wlad would have been rightfully seen as a more dangerous challenger than Byrd.

 

I guess the name Tyson built Lewis's legacy better than the name Byrd.

 

Its like asking why didnt Man city face Grimsby town

 

Fair point on Wlad's loss to Sanders. This site - https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2002 - lists Wlad the #1 Ring contender in the May 2003 issue (Lewis vs Vitali was June 2003), but with Sanders not in the top 10, it must have been formed before he stopped Wlad in March of that year.

I dispute that Byrd was the clear 1 contender. Just 2 and a half years earlier Wlad beat Byrd in an extremely one sided fight and so Sanders had an obvious claim to be ranked ahead of Byrd, though admittedly I don't who the ring ranked #1 when Lewis fought Vitali.

I do know that the boxing public and Lewis all saw Vitali as a much harder and more interesting fight than Byrd.

 

W

Well you just reinforced my post ,arent United the Grimsby town of the prem? cmon Byrd wasnt even fit to be cook Lennox's poached egg on toast

 

Actually, in pointing out Wlad had just lost to Sanders, you've convinced me Sanders has the best case for been ducked (though I don't think any one has a reasonable case for being ducked by Lewis).

Wlad was #1 contender, rightfully ahead of Byrd, who he had arguably beaten 120-106, 12 rounds to 0 with 2 KD's in a terribly 1-sided fight, when Sanders beat him, so my guess is Sanders was the Ring's #1 contender when Lewis fought Vitali, with Wlad possibly #2. Sanders beating Wlad is justification for replacing him as the #1 contender, not for Byrd being ranked ahead the guy who dominated him to such an extent.

Either way, if Lewis signing to defend against Johnson is a duck, then everytime a champion defends against anyone but the number 1 contender, they're ducking someone.

 

Fair enough, whilst personally I set the bar for what constitutes a duck higher, if your criteria to be met for a duck is a champion defending against anyone but the number 1 contender, then by your criteria Lewis definitely ducked someone, probably Sanders, when he signed to fight Johnson.