Why doesn't Lennox have universal approval ?

he does have "universal approval" to the people that know what they are talking about , its only the born haters that make you think otherwise , if lewis was an american the hate posts would reduce by 99% .

 

This is pretty much true.

The fairer observers acknowledge the merits of his resume, whether they lean towards new dog or old.

 

Except... its not true, if he was some force of nature ruling over the heavyweight division, do you really think the world wouldn't have took notice? Is it really some American thing? I highly doubt he is getting universal love anywhere on the planet with reverence to this imagined legacy? he wasn't when he was active, he never set the world on fire as some cant miss heavy even at his best..He will NEVER be revered as a Tyson,Ali,Holmes..

 

He is appreciated more over time. Holmes was vastly under rated in his day.

 

Many all time greats don't get immediate recognition.

Some like Sullivan, Dempsey, Louis and Tyson do.

In the cases of others like Jeffries, Johnson, Holmes, and even Ali to a lesser extent, it took time for the reality to dawn on people.

 

I've taught you enough: you, who thought Lewis won two Olympic medals.

Ranting will not erase your continued ignorance.

 

Respectfully, like the boy who saw through the Emperor's New Clothes, you, newbie friend, have nailed it.

The entire world is potentially a passionate boxing ****yst, because everybody - men and women and children alike, regardless of country and socioeconomic stratum - can understand boxing at an elementary, primordial, level: It's a fight. The story of life on Earth. And some men are uniquely skilled at it. And they've always set the world on fire.

Dempsey, Louis, Ali, Tyson...they all made the world sit up and notice.
From a young age. They were one of a kind.

Lewis - the now, to some, supposed greatest heavyweight ever - never did anything of the sort.

I don't "hate" Lewis: a silly notion mouthed here by some. I just love boxing too much to present this large man with any undeserved scepters.

It must be said:

a) He was a man beating up boys as an Olympian: hardly GOAT material. Cassius Clay, by contrast, was 18 when he beat Pietrzykowski, 25, for gold in Rome. A bit backwards is the Lewis legacy!

b) As a young heavyweight, he never showed a unique ability: the speed of an Ali; the ferocity of a Dempsey; the power of a George Foreman; the speed, ferocity and power of young Mike Tyson. No. Lewis stands alone as a "great" who brought together unique abilities in his 30's - still getting knocked out en route. A "GOAT" such as this will never create a corresponding legitimate fan base, because from the beginning there was no GOAT to speak of.

c) Lewis never challenged and defeated a young, invincible champion as an old man, like Ali did. Lewis' signature wins were against old men: old versions and hopelessly faded versions, respectively, of past greats in Holyfield and Tyson. Hardly GOAT material. A bit backwards again is the Lewis legacy!

d) Lewis never put together a long, dominant reign, like Louis and Holmes did. Hardly GOAT material.

Lewis beat a lot of punchers, who lacked solid boxing fundamentals.

A Shannon Briggs, a David Tua, a Tommy Morrison - whom Lewis dominated - could probably spark out a Jerry Quarry, a Max Schmeling, a James Jeffries, a Floyd Patterson, a Jack Sharkey, an Ezzard Charles, a Jersey Joe Walcott: most of the much smaller, past heavyweights.

This '90s crew was still just a collection of punchers, who lacked solid fundamentals. Pound for pound, they were nothing special, as old versions of Holmes and Foreman proved.

To me, this is Lewis' legacy. Make no mistake: it's a real legacy. But it's not GOAT material: Lewis was the best in an era of two shells of greats in Holyfield and Tyson...and a bunch of huge, limited punchers, some of whom were found to be on PEDs.

Even head-to-head, as long as men such as Ali and young Mike Tyson exist in the heavyweight ranks, he is not GOAT material.

In his ultra-late bloom, Lewis is a contradiction of the heavyweight record, as I have outlined. This is not GOAT material.

The Emperor is naked. Some admire him. World, let's move on.

 

"A man beating up boys as an Olympian" Lewis's opponents in the Seoul Olympics were
Odera 2 years older
Kadez 6 years older
Bowe 3 years younger
Lewis beat good boxers like:
Tucker& Biggs
And probably the biggest collection of punchers ever.

The fact that some of his oppopnents were past their best is hardly his fault since Holyfield and Tyson by passed him and Bowe flat out refused to face him.
He isn't GOAT material imo, but next to Ali ,[ who is the prime candidate ,] he is probably the most problematical Champion for the others to beat.

 

Unlike you, when I make an error I'm man enough to admit it. Yes, I had thought Lewis won an Olympic silver metal and a gold, and I was wrong.

Comments above show you're quite capable of making errors yourself, the difference is you're doing to out of spite, I'm not.

But the question I asked you was to show me proof that Lewis used PED's, which was what you claimed.

Your response is simply yet another demonstration of your childish attitude.

 

- Lewis didn't fight the prime Tyson and this is 100% Lewis' fault.
Lennox Lewis was a nobody in pro when Tyson ruled the world and he's older than
Tyson this proves he wasn't good enough against the prime Tyson.

Lewis hasn't big collection of punchers.
I think Tua,Bruno,Morrison,Briggs could knock out nobody for a IBF/WBC/WBA
title win.
Weaver was 40 years old. Tyson and Tucker were far away from their primes
Rahman has only one significant ko win. Who was his victim? Can you help me?
Oh yes Lennox the GLASS-CHINNED.
Ruddock ? His biggest thing was his toughness against Tyson.
(Tyson used him like a punchin' bag and i think destroyed Ruddock's punching
resistance.) Ruddock never was a real big thing.He looked impressive
against hasbeens.

Only Vitali Klitschko was Lewis' competent good puncher opponent.

-Lewis always looked beatable.
Mccall and Rahman destroyed him EASILY.
(Mccall couldn't knock the 45 years old Holmes out and Rahman couldn't
knock the 42 years old Berbick out.This says all about these(McCall and Rahman) fighters quality.
-Bruno and Vitali Klitschko outclassed Lewis by skill.
-The fat slow Mercer (old Holmes victim) outjabbed Lewis.
-Lewis was in big trouble against Briggs or Akinwande.
(I think practically Akinwande-the mr. featherfist- knocked down Lewis.)
And the impotent Lewis beat Akinwande by a lucky disqualification.

All in all Lewis was good but these problems and his short carrier (only 44 fights) destroys his top 10 place in heavyweight history.


Plus honorable mention his unskilled coward holding ****

 

Am I the first to tell you , you're an absolute tw*t?

 

Lewis was a huge puncher, though, with his share of exciting KOs.
My view is that, as a young contender, he was tentative and looked beatable. So he created no true fan base. Only after beating Holyfield was Lewis recognized, at age 33(!), as the best. And, even then, he would later get knocked out.

Ali was a boxer, but everybody (save Joe Louis) acknowledged his skills. He talked, but he was clearly the best guy out there, from age 22!

Tunney beat the popular Dempsey, which made him non grata. There was no inherent bias against Lewis, except "Lennox who?" Lewis kept plugging along (losing a title on the way), but attention was on Tyson and Holyfield. Then Holyfield licked Tyson and Lewis beat Holyfield. The world finally acknowledged Lewis as king. But, by then, Lewis was 33, had no true fan base, would again lose his title, and finally cement a legacy beating the shadow of Tyson and squeaking past Vitali.

In light of history, is this timeline not weird? Name one heavyweight great who was better at age 33 than in his 20s. One: Lennox Lewis. Oh, and Evander Holyfield, who at 34 beat Mike Tyson. Of course, Holyfield used PEDs. It can't be said any clearer: humans - and therefore, athletes - are more physically proficient in their 20s than in their 30s! Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Ali, Holmes, Tyson - they all were! A 23-year-old man is more athletically able than a 33-year-old man!

Lewis learned, you say. He improved. Sure, he learned more boxing - as all other past greats did. But, by age 33, those other greats compensated for declining skills with such experience (or they had retired or lost the title). And the rest all soon hit the wall. Lewis just kept getting better than he ever was before: bigger, stronger, faster. His physical skills - his equipment, in his words - just kept becoming more and more enhanced, to go along with his enhanced knowledge, and, after beating an old Holyfield, he became top dog.

Lewis' prolonged physical proficiency is key to making Lewis Lewis.

Please excuse me if I suspect performance enhancement, in an era strewn with it.

I only fear that future generations will look at that huge, amazing Lion, with that great handspeed and two-fisted power, knocking out bona fide powerhouses, and elevate him as GOAT. By contrast, Ali's biggest challenges were a little chubby man called Frazier and a measly 216-pounder in Foreman. Without context, Lewis looks better than Ali in quite a few ways.

Kudos to Lewis for his medal. Respect.

But there's more than meets the eye: at age 23, Lewis packed up for Seoul as his second Olympic trip so, he was an uncommonly seasoned competitor from the trials on up. He certainly benefited from experience others didn't have, and especially in the final against Bowe who, yes, was 2 years younger. Patterson won gold at 17; Clay at 18; Frazier at 20; Foreman at 19.

For McGrain to say one is "bang-on" is a compliment!

On pure resume, Lewis' shines: he beat everybody. I respect Lewis. Head-to-head, he is a nightmare. On his best night, he pretty much could do it all. And he was HUGE! On his best night, he was very confident, smart, powerful, and had very few weaknesses.

But there's more than meets the eye. For one, those "best nights" were too few and far between.

Invincible is the word. Ali was an old man, risking life and limb in challenging the monster champion Foreman. This kind of romance is part of what the Lennox legacy lacks.

Lewis squeaked past a maturing - not champion - Vitali. And then retired.

Again, Lewis beat everybody. No disputing that.

Holmes and Foreman proved much.

They were great past champions who, as old men, held their own, were never embarrassed or knocked out or promptly sent back to Bolivian, against prime versions of champion Evander Holyfield (twice!), and other young, powerful members of this '90s crew, including champion Oliver McCall and, of course, champion Moorer.

By contrast, look what happened to Holmes when he faced a true all-time great in Mike Tyson. A younger old Holmes!

Holmes-Mercer is a parable for old-school virtues.

It enhances his legacy if he is clean. I hope, and pray, he is.

 

Oh, that this thread would just be answered and then disappear!! The reasons that LL doesn't have "universal approval" are :
1. He was British...and spoke with a cultured sounding, non-ghetto, British accent.
2. Lewis obviously was/is intelligent....deduct points as in the "Gene Tunney Syndrome"....a champion boxer "must not" sound intelligent....ever.
3. He had a "Plan B" fighting style. Unfortunately, that Plan B was rather cautious, conservative and dull for the average fan, as it involved being smart and taking as few risks as possible. A big "no-no" for a champion.
4. LL had a cool arrogance....rather, a towering arrogance. Can't blame him for this, as great champions SHOULD have a certain arrogance, but add it up with the 3 previous sins, and it's virtually unforgivable in LL's case.
5.His two losses. Never mind that LL emphatically erased these two losses in rematches...the fact that he was caught off guard both times and sparked, added together with sins 1 through 4 and these defeats are unforgivable.
6. He avenged his two defeats. Doesn't count, by virtue of sins 1 through 5.
7. He never fought Rid**** Bowe as a professional. The fact that Bowe plainly DIDN'T WANT to fight LL, and tossed his belts in the garbage can doesn't matter.
8. LL defeated icons Holyfield and Tyson...he was dull in beating Holyfield and fought Tyson past Iron Mike's prime...two big no-no's...never mind that both these reasons are bull****, plain and proper. He met both and defeated both,...end of story.....but he was guilty as charged, anyway.
9. LL never rematched Vitali Klitschko. So 'effin what? Lewis was way past his best days, and did the intelligent thing by retiring...repeat,...the INTELLIGENT thing. That echoes sin number 2...that Gene Tunney Syndrome thing again.
There, I hope that settles things a bit...and it does, from my perspective, at least.

 

His accent doesn't sound British to us Brits.
He sounds more American to us.