To make up for his lack of inside fighting skills, Emanuel Steward did a good job teaching Lewis how to tie up inside and use his huge frame to lean on top of guys and tire them out. He would also hold and telegraph huge right hands to knock guys out. Its quite surprising he was not disqualified for it as it was apparent in many of his fights against guys like Bruno, Grant, Tyson, and more.
What made you say Lewis? There is a certain heavyweight which you could've used as an example who had a long reign and did a lot of holding and we all know who I'm talking about
Quite simply...no. Of course, with his ability to box and bomb, some fighters, Bruno for one, would not lose any worse despite a lack of holding. Other fighters that are tough to get a grip on, like Mercer, I think Lewis would have had a much much rougher time. So I shouldn't actually say "Quite simply...no". That statement is not universally applied.
Holding so much is wrong & illegal. Especially when you punch when doing it. I do not care how common it is. Now boxers may not be corrupt or intending to cheat-the temptation to protect yourself, win & not be Blasted Out makes it often understandable. But we should assess how much it contributed to a fighter's success when evaluating their greatness. Refereeds should be much better at enforcing the rules.
Sure it should be assessed, but only given the context that most of the greats of, at very least, this division, have had their own preferred tactics that are overlooked because they had the power behind them. Holding is actually despised more on boxing forums for being violence-depleting, whereas arguably far more dangerous fouling behaviour that is violence-contributing is often totally overlooked from a fan-perspective but just as overlooked in officiation (headbutts, thumbing, elbowing, etc.) So, almost no one's success wasn't partially aided by having the suspect benefit of the referee's judgment. The number of times I've seen George Foreman get away with things-I mean-this man would have a loss to Joe Roman if he were fairly called. How would or should that affect his legacy? Let's not even talk about Marciano's violent illegality affecting his career outcomes. How does his record look with a loss to Don C., as compared to the great 0 that follows around his assessments?
Very obnoxious trait so many boxers did more often then Lennox, However If we were all forced to fight with the same intents as Roberto Duran no holding just fight till the bell rings then it would make the game quite horrific for the outside fighters we all appreciate so much.
Clinching is a crappy aspect of boxing and unfortunately there have been a lot of great boxers that have done it. One of my favourites, Wlad, was guilty of doing it a lot and in some cases he turned fights that should have been hella exciting on paper (eg Povetkin) into atrocious viewing. Lewis did it too, so did Ali, Johnson and guys like "Huggy Bear" Ruiz. And that's just at HW. I'd be happy if referees cracked down on this aspect and made clinching a more actionable offence. All that said I think Lewis would always have been a champion since his outboxing was so good.
An interesting & actually serious post very good B.E.! Why & how do you think Roman would have beat Foreman? A fight I am more familiar with...I cannot see how Marciano could have lost to Cockell. Although he deserved an actual defeat scored vs. Lowery the first time.