Would Lewis have gone through wlad s opponents undefeated?

Lewis would lose several times had he fought Wlad's resume. Wlad doesn't get enough credit for taking on numerous contenders at their absolute peak. Nor does he get enough credit for the sheer volume of opponents he has faced. The man is pushing 70 career fights at heavyweight. In today's age that is crazy. Foreman and Holmes achieved it but they fought many low tier fighters during their comebacks. Wlad has consistently fought Top fighters for 17 years or so.
Lewis fought bigger names and the the talent level was better in the 90s but there is no way his consistency would match Wlad.
As for the Haye debate, Lewis was clearly better than Haye but Haye's style and quickness would be a problem.

 

Yeah well that is the crux of the thread. If you want me to transport prime peak Lewis into every match Wlad has fought then Lewis could conceivably go undefeated but that's now how the real world works.
Lewis had off nights, McCall and Rahman proved that. He would run into those same problems against Wlad's resume. He also would not have lasted nearly as long as Wlad who comes dedicated every night

 

Nobody would be a betting favorite, but then again neither were Hasim Rahman and Oliver McCall. His main problem would be his focus and age. Wlad fought a number of opponents who had the ability to upset Lewis if he didn't take them seriously. If he started Wlad's resume at the same age he turned pro in his own career he'd be in his late 30s by the time he got to 50+ fights. Lewis at 37 looked like a shadow of himself, can you imagine how he would perform into his 40s?

 

Man for man no.
But as i said earlier, for one reason or another he may find his McCall or Rahman.
The fighters in Wlads era arent a patch on Lewis' era overall so theres a chance Lennox might make it. Law of averages says he has a bad night somewhere.

 

I think what this thread reinforces for me is what an astonishingly deep resume Lennox has.

 

Its probably not humanely possibly to be at your 100% best and focussed every fight and there lies the danger, even for a great champ. Its why Ali fought the Wepners and the Coopmans , its why Holmes fought the Cobb's etc, to be fair to Lewis most of his fights were against guys seen as a threat. Early days Biggs had just given Bowe hell for 7 rounds / Mason was betting favourite/ Ruddock also /Bruno had his supporters / many fancied Morrison to deck him/ He was only a narrow favourite over both Holyfield and Tyson/ Alot of people said Tua would knock him out/ i remember it all in real time.
He fought a hell of a list of 'live' fights ( ones where the other guy was given a chance by many).

 

tyson fury would take him to school like he took wlad, at least the older version

 

There's no chance in hell that Lewis would have fought Wlad's resume fight for fight and gone undefeated.

And the reason is very simple, and has nothing to do with natural ability or skill.

The reason is that Lewis blew hot and cold and had difficulty in motivating himself to perform at the highest level on a consistent basis, whereas Wladimir always - bar perhaps the Fury fight - comes in perfectly toned and focused.

If Lewis had an "off" night there are many opponents on Wlad's resume that could lay him out cold. Yet here we are asking him to have more fights over a longer period and maintain a perfect record? No.

When Lewis was 37-38 his conditioning had gone and I think that mentally he was running on fumes. If he couldn't get himself motivated or bothered enough to come in conditioned against a H2H beast like Vitali, how bad wouldn't he have looked against Pulev, Wach, Jennings, Fury or Povetkin? All of whom I could totally see beating down a blob version of Lennox.

I reckon he'd have losses alright.

 

hwat, Chaggy, POvetkin and Haye? HA.

When they are your best wins theres something wrong.

 

Yes. Tyson Fury when he's in shape is very underrated fighter.

He beat Chisora and Hammer like they are Z-level fighters, they lost every second of every round.

Wlad couldn't land a single good punch on him.

I struggle to find any 39 y.o. HW in history to beat focused Fury

 

I've always wondered if perhaps some of the slicksters like Eddie Champbers and Chris Byrd would have given Lewis some problems. Looking back I don't seem to recall him fighting anyone like that.

 

OLD Weaver, NUTS version of McCall, past prime Holyfield, SHOT Tyson ... holes can be poked in Lewis' resume too, if one but looks.

 

I really don't see anyone running through Wlad's 68 opponents undefeated.

That's just too much.

I don't think a HW in history has been consistent enough from 21 to 41 years of age to pull this off. The level of dedication to stay in top form for that long and perform to their pinnacle is impossible.

Lewis at 44 fights was the most consistent HW of the 90s and he still had two off nights that resulted in knockout losses and some close calls against Mercer, Holyfield 2, and Vitali. Plus he was retired by 38.

Holmes is the only guy best suited for this, and even he started having bad performances by 33 and lost his 0 against Spinks.

What Wlad has done, was carve out his legacy niche. He may not have the absolute best wins but he beat alot of good fighters of various size and style, but his long stay at the top, and absurd schedule against mostly rated world class opponents of all size and style is unprecedented.