Peak Larry Holmes vs Peak Lennox Lewis

Rocky Balboa · Post by **Rocky Balboa** » 07 Feb 2004, 17:46

Now that Lennox Lewis has retired, I feel now is the time to start pitching him against the greatest heavyweight champions of all time.

It is quite a debate when deciding where Lewis ranks in terms of the greatest heavyweight fighters ever. IMO, I would rank Lennox in the top-10, but not the top-5.

However, Larry Holmes is in the top-5 for me. Holmes was a masterful and aggressive boxer, with the best jab in history, and a good right hand and the best recovery powers ever seen on a heavyweight.

Over the next few days, I am going to post topics on Lewis against the all-time great heavyweights. For no particular reason at all, I have chosen to start with Larry Holmes first.

Lets have your predicitons on this one!

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 07 Feb 2004, 18:53

Holmes too good for Lennox in a distance fight. He would take away Lennox's jab, shrug off the occasional big right and outbox the somewhat heavy-footed Lewis.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 07 Feb 2004, 19:50

Holmes would've had trouble with the sheer size of Lewis I think. Lewis had great skill for a man his size, not to mention a right hand that could be ranked with the very best.
But over 15 rounds I'd go for Larry to gut out a decison with that amazing jab of his. Both probably hurting each other along the way.

Peak Holmes was probably 1981/2 - his great win was over Cooney, but he was lethal the night he destroyed poor Leon Spinks too.
Lewis most famous win will probably be over the faded Tyson, or the Rahman rematch. I'm not sure when you'd say his peak was, because he'd pull off a great win followed by a not so great one.
Anyway I'd pick Holmes W15.

crooked nose · Post by **crooked nose** » 08 Feb 2004, 03:36

Whoa, Mighty Warrior, where did you get that 198 weight for Holmes? He was always at 210 or more. Lewis would outweigh him but not by so much! I see Holmes winning a play-it-safe 15 round decision. Lewis just not aggressive enough to nail a decision. Holmes would outwork a too-cautious Lewis. Both were great technicians. In that category, I would rank them both tops along with Ali and Tunney. Both Holmes and Lewis were vulnerable to a power puncher (McCall, Rahman, Shavers) but Holmes had the stones to get up and recover.

Dave1armedTua · Post by **Dave1armedTua** » 08 Feb 2004, 06:48

Crooked: I don't believe Mighty was saying Holmes's prime was at 198lbs..... he was saying that his prime was around the years 1981 to 1982. Look closer.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 08 Feb 2004, 07:22

That's right DT, I was refering to his peak years - though looking back his two wins over Shavers were pretty good, apart from that one right hand. Not forgeting the Norton epic either - greatest heavyweight 15th round ever? ( Weaver/Tate round 15 wasn't to bad either ).

I was trying to recall Holmes best fighting weight, around 210 I guess. Lewis had a longer reach and a height advantage too.

crooked nose · Post by **crooked nose** » 08 Feb 2004, 18:22

OK, I see it now.
There seems to be a pretty strong consensus for Holmes by decision. Somehow, Lewis seemed to lack that little extra. Call it desire or killer instinct or whatever, but I think that quality contributed to his being viewed as an uninspiring champion. There really wasn't a defining moment or signature fight. Too bad, because he had a ton of skill and I'd like to see more fighters appreciated for their technique rather than raw power or insanity outside the ring.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 09 Feb 2004, 14:07

Holmes by mid rounds KO.

Holmes had way too much class for Lewis.

Lewis would be way out of his depth in with the Easton Assassin.

The_Power · Post by **The_Power** » 10 Feb 2004, 05:21

These two are in different leagues as far as i am concerned, larry would force the late stoppage from lewis, and i think would dominate most of the fight. That jab right cross combo would have peppered lewis' face all night long.

revporl · Post by **revporl** » 10 Feb 2004, 05:49

yeah, ko or tko for Holmes in the last third of the fight, dominating with that jab and finishing him off with those big right crosses like the one that decked M Frazier.

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 12 Feb 2004, 14:54

i disagree, lewis`s opponents were a better class than larry`s.
lennox lewis was olympic champ, won the title and beat men like tyson, holyfield, bowe (ams), tucker , golota, tua, ruddock, mercer, morrison, botha, klitschcko,briggs, grant, mccall and bruno amongst others and whilst not world beaters they are a respectable lot. he retired champion and the two fights he lost (probably due to overconfidence because he never lost a big, career defining one e.g tyson, holyfield etc.) he avenged emphatically.
i think lewis and holmes are intresting comparisons one had to wait years to get proper recognition and the other will have to wait years to get proper recognition.
lewis in my opinion is also one of the biggest punchers in heavyweight history, this allied to his boxing skills would give ANY heavyweight in history problems.

The_Power · Post by **The_Power** » 12 Feb 2004, 17:00

headhunter wrote:i disagree, lewis`s opponents were a better class than larry`s.
lennox lewis was olympic champ, won the title and beat men like tyson, holyfield, bowe (ams), tucker , golota, tua, ruddock, mercer, morrison, botha, klitschcko,briggs, grant, mccall and bruno amongst others and whilst not world beaters they are a respectable lot. he retired champion and the two fights he lost (probably due to overconfidence because he never lost a big, career defining one e.g tyson, holyfield etc.) he avenged emphatically.
i think lewis and holmes are intresting comparisons one had to wait years to get proper recognition and the other will have to wait years to get proper recognition.
lewis in my opinion is also one of the biggest punchers in heavyweight history, this allied to his boxing skills would give ANY heavyweight in history problems.

i personally think that Shavers, Norton, Cooney, Cobb where also respectable opponants.

However lennox lewis was KO'ed Twice by journeyman, something that never happened to holmes, this fact alone puts larry above lennox.

Lennox's victories over Tyson and Holyfield, where when they where past there best, but credit to him, he DID beat them both. Also he never beat bowe in the professional ranks, which will always leave ?? even if not lennox's fault.

Also the picture of frank bruno outboxing him for 6 rounds sticks in my mind, something i could never seen larry struggleing with.

Lewis is probably the best fighter of this generation, but to my mind, has not as been as convincing or shown the skills of larry holmes.

Dave1armedTua · Post by **Dave1armedTua** » 12 Feb 2004, 17:11

lennox lewis was olympic champ, won the title and beat men like tyson, holyfield, bowe (ams), tucker , golota, tua, ruddock, mercer, morrison, botha, klitschcko,briggs, grant, mccall and bruno

Where to begin.

Tyson has been shot for 15 years

Holyfield is so far over the hill he is buried on the other side....and STILL almost beat Lewis

amateur fights mean nothing; James Tillis beat Tyson quite soundly in the ams, only to get destroyed in pro

Golota is a joke (not even a funny one, an annoying one like "Why did the chicken cross the road")

Morrison was an overhyped fraud

The same goes for Briggs and Grant

Botha is only average

And McCall was a pyscho bastard that had a mental breakdown from stress and cocaine (after leveling Lewis the first time)

So, here is the list we are left with:

Tua
Ruddock
Bruno
Klitschko
Mercer

The list only looks sub-par now. Now, let's compare some of the opponents BOTH boxers faced:

McCall:
Destroyed Lewis in 2 rounds, then went crazy in the second fight.

Barely squeaked out a victory over a 45 year old Holmes in 12 rounds, then refused a rematch a year later.

Mercer:
Made Lewis look foolish and lost a close decision.

Lost by a mile to Holmes.
Did I mention that Holmes gave Mercer the boxing lesson of his life at the time? Did I also mention that Holmes gave Mercer his first loss, in his prime, when Holmes was 43 years old?

I'm not trying to discredit Lewis, he was good. However, you're trying to compare him to someone that was great; and was still keeping up with him in accomplishments 8 years after he should have retired and stayed retired.

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 13 Feb 2004, 07:36

You forgot to mention Lewis got out pretty lucky against Vitali.

"Look at the state of his face!!"

Prime Holmes is the only heavyweight I could see taking on anyone and winning.

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 13 Feb 2004, 10:38

lennox lewis is bigger than larry and a bigger puncher imo.
okay lewis lost twice when he got caught, that happens in the heavyweight division, but lets not forget larry lost two decisions to a light heavyweight (close ones admittedly but lewis would have bombed spinks out of there).
i like holmes, and respect the fella, but i think the heavyweight scene at the time of his reign was weak, the early eighties was full of out of shape coke heads.
you can say tyson was past his best and so was holyfield but they were still big fights and he won them, and even past their best were still better than the likes of cooney. and when you go on about grant etc bieng overrated, in the u.k we were bieng told that this man was destroying all his opponents and had fast twitch muscles, the ultimate physical specimen etc. he couldn`t be beaten, i actually think lewis wasn`t the bookies favourite for that one. what happens? lewis bangs him out and suddenly he`s crap, not that lewis is any good. golota`s a joke? only when lewis exposed him, before that fight he was the meanest, dirtiest fighter in the division and he was going rip lewis`s head off.
in my opinion because of his size skill and power, and when he was up for it ,by which i mean he was fighting someone he thought could beat him, lennox lewis would beat everyone who has gone before bar ali. thats my honest opinion, nothing to do with where he comes from or anything else.
i only call it as i see it.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 13 Feb 2004, 10:43

headhunter wrote:lennox lewis is bigger than larry and a bigger puncher imo.
okay lewis lost twice when he got caught, that happens in the heavyweight division, but lets not forget larry lost two decisions to a light heavyweight (close ones admittedly but lewis would have bombed spinks out of there).
i like holmes, and respect the fella, but i think the heavyweight scene at the time of his reign was weak, the early eighties was full of out of shape coke heads.
you can say tyson was past his best and so was holyfield but they were still big fights and he won them, and even past their best were still better than the likes of cooney. and when you go on about grant etc bieng overrated, in the u.k we were bieng told that this man was destroying all his opponents and had fast twitch muscles, the ultimate physical specimen etc. he couldn`t be beaten, i actually think lewis wasn`t the bookies favourite for that one. what happens? lewis bangs him out and suddenly he`s crap, not that lewis is any good. golota`s a joke? only when lewis exposed him, before that fight he was the meanest, dirtiest fighter in the division and he was going rip lewis`s head off.
in my opinion because of his size skill and power, and when he was up for it ,by which i mean he was fighting someone he thought could beat him, lennox lewis would beat everyone who has gone before bar ali. thats my honest opinion, nothing to do with where he comes from or anything else.
i only call it as i see it.

The Cooney of 82 would have beaten the Tyson who fought Lewis and Maybe Holyfield too.

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 13 Feb 2004, 12:43

Holmes was only a few years shy of 40 when he lost those two controversial decisions to Spinks. Fact is, Holmes was never beaten close to his prime, nuch less KOed.

Lewis has often been outboxed, but in many cases his sheer size advantage allowed him to stop the guy late. I can see the Mike Spinks (you may say "just a light-heavy", but Spinks had a huge frame for a LHW) that beat Holmes on points also giving Lewis fits, especially a 36 or 37-year-old Lewis, i.e. one of the same age as Holmes was when he faced the Jinx.

Don't get me wrong - I believe Lewis on his best night would give any heavy in history a run for their money - but the problem with Lewis is that he gave us no small number of bad nights (typically through lack of training and taking his opponent lightly), but unlike other guys who committed similar sins (e.g. Ali), didn't have the kind of chin that could help him past those rough spots. Those two KO losses to journeymen can and must be held against him when judging him vs. fellow all-time greats.

But I've already written a long post about this, so I refer you to

http://www.boxrec.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14921

Dave1armedTua · Post by **Dave1armedTua** » 13 Feb 2004, 16:09

HH, it seems like you have a pretty selective memory.

but lets not forget larry lost two decisions to a light heavyweight (close ones admittedly but lewis would have bombed spinks out of there).

No kiidding? HE WAS AN OLD MAN. You must not know much about boxing if you don't realize that speed and stamina are the first things to go with age. Just look what happened to Ali in his twilight years.

Spinks might have actually been able to outbox Lewis at this point in time; seeing as how he was getting beat to the punch by a lumbering behemoth.

Want actual evidence? Find a tape of Mercer vs. Lewis and watch how a much smaller and less powerful man boxes Lewis's ears off in what was supposed to be an easy fight.

the heavyweight scene at the time of his reign was weak, the early eighties was full of out of shape coke heads.

As opposed to the 90's, who's champs were left over garbage from the 80's. I'm sure those coke heads got better being 10 years oldier.

you can say tyson was past his best and so was holyfield but they were still big fights and he won them,

Then I guess Holmes is The Greatest of All Time, because he is the only man to have stopped Muhammad Ali. Your logic has just destroyed your arguement.

and when you go on about grant etc bieng overrated, in the u.k we were bieng told that this man was destroying all his opponents and had fast twitch muscles, the ultimate physical specimen etc. he couldn`t be beaten, i actually think lewis wasn`t the bookies favourite for that one. what happens? lewis bangs him out and suddenly he`s crap,

Ok, this inane comment isn't exactly your fault, since I'm doubting that England gets many of America's sports talk shows.

After Grant's piss poor performance against Golota, many people saw the warning signs of "garbage". Although crackheads like Kellerman continued their pre-paid babbeling.

Lewis may not have been the betting favorite over there, but he was still in the lead on Vegas odds.

golota`s a joke? only when lewis exposed him

Ya. LEWIS exposed him.......not Bowe, the man Golota had to nutbag out of frustration......or Marion Wilson, the 207lb man who wouldn't fall down so Golota headbutted the crap out of.......or Robert Smith, the guy who scared Golota so bad, Golota pulled the first "Tyson" and bit him on the shoulder twice. (without getting DQ by the inept ref)

This isn't a boxer, this is a scared little boy lashing out when he is hurt. And when he can't lash out, he quits. Impressive.

I respect your opinion, but you seem to be lacking on much info, and are forming it on partial facts instead of the whole picture.

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 13 Feb 2004, 16:16

look holmes was never beaten in his prime because there was no one around to beat him. a heavyweight title fight in those days looked like two 4kin elephant seals getting jiggy wid it. it was like watching a wildlife documentary. holmes was so great h/w boxing was dying a death until tyson came along.(oooh but not the tyson that fought lewis).
marciano was put down by moore (an old light heavy), charles (a light heavy) and walcott (just old). you make this sound like a badge of honour for the rock, if this was lewis you`d be saying he`s chinny because light fellas are chilling his brains, considering lewis is so chinny its a miracle only two blokes knocked him out, how come if he`s got such a chandalier jaw that people like tyson and tua couldn`t stop him. dont give me none of that `tyson was finished crap` by the sounds of it all he had to do was swing a punch and the breeze of it would have sent lewis to la-la land.oh, but when joe louis (in his prime) is put down by fellas like two ton ton galento, james braddock and buddy baer its his amazing powers of recovery we should marvel at. (that or you`ll say they were savage, underrated bangers), you use one set of credentials to judge lewis and another for everyone else.
you rate foreman above lewis, wasn`t he sparked by a relativley light puncher in ali? how many title defences did he make?
lennox lewis suffers because of his cautious style, his aloofness and because he is not american. he beats all the major players in his generation who give or take a few years are similar in age to him, but some who he`s beaten are considered by some better than him? whats he got to do ? as soon as lewis beats someone they are .....shot, overrated, too old, not ready etc. tysons burnt out? say tyson would have beat lewis, would everyone be saying tyson wouldn`t beat the lewis of 1998? would they f**k!!
its personal with lewis for a lot of people and they wont admit it to themselves never mind anyone else.

Dave1armedTua · Post by **Dave1armedTua** » 13 Feb 2004, 18:32

marciano was put down by moore (an old light heavy), charles (a light heavy) and walcott (just old). you make this sound like a badge of honour for the rock, if this was lewis you`d be saying he`s chinny because light fellas are chilling his brains

In all those cases, those "light" guys were actually larger than Marciano. You say Lewis getting knocked down is no big deal, it happens to everyone. Your right. The difference between Lewis and Marciano:

Marciano actually GOT BACK UP.

how come if he`s got such a chandalier jaw that people like tyson and tua couldn`t stop him.

Because they both suck at boxing and landed a total of about 5 punches combined (I think 1 jab might have actually grazed Lewis's face in these 2 fights)

You can be the strongest man in the world, fighting the weakest chin of all time; but if you can't actually hit that chin, you won't win.

dont give me none of that `tyson was finished crap` by the sounds of it all he had to do was swing a punch and the breeze of it would have sent lewis to la-la land.oh,

What the Hell planet are you living on? Have you actually seen Tyson fight since he got out of jail? Or are you just another mindless lemming, sucking down the garbage the media spoon feeds you to get your money. Name one fight since Tyson got out of the slammer where he actually showed skill.
......
YOU CAN'T. All he has done since 95' is go out, throw wide looping bombs, and pray to God they land. Where is his footwork? Where is his defense? Where is his inside work? Where are the lightning flurries and well-timed combos that devastated his opponents in 1987?

They are in the grave. They died along with his sanity in a 4 by 4 cell.

but when joe louis (in his prime) is put down by fellas like two ton ton galento, james braddock and buddy baer its his amazing powers of recovery we should marvel at. (that or you`ll say they were savage, underrated bangers), you use one set of credentials to judge lewis and another for everyone else.

Both got knocked down by some rather unimpressive fighters. Again, Louis actually got up after he was hurt, Lewis didn't. I'd say that is the same set of credentials.

you rate foreman above lewis, wasn`t he sparked by a relativley light puncher in ali?

OHHHHH so NOW Ali is garbage, and losing to him is something to be ashamed of. You love to pull 180's don't you? Oddly enough, that light puncher has more wins by knock out than Lewis, and both the guys wo KO'ed him.

Foreman won the championship of the world at age 24, Lewis didn't do that until 34. Foreman won it again at age 45, something no heavyweight in history has ever done. You don't think that is an accomplishment?

Not only did you stray completely off topic, you also failed to make any point whatsoever.

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 13 Feb 2004, 20:30

maybe marciano isnt the best example to make my point, but there are fighters rated above lewis who have been stopped and visited the canvas more frequently. the two stoppages maybe stop him from bieng number one, but i dont think lewis`s record is that of a chinny fighter.
especially for a division like the heavyweights.
(my point about marciano is that relativley light men put him down, moore for a count of nine or longer, so using the strict rules lewis`s legacy seems to be judged by a top 5 all timer should not be frequently put down period, even if he does get back up.)
you mention davey that tyson and tua "suck" and they landed one jab or something, my point is that lewis has fought a lot of men and has taken a lot of punches without tottering everytime one landed, i dont consider him chinney, he might not have a cast iron jaw, but his record is not that of a chinney fighter. two trips to the canvas in forty or so fights?
you mention george winning the title at 45, come on, it was some spurious version of it, if he had beaten lewis, holyfield (or even rahman or mccall when they held it) then you could run that one past me, he was not considered the best heavy at that time so i dont buy into this two time world champ stuff. (admittedly just competing at that level at that age is a mighty feat, it doesn`t neccessarly propell you to the top of the atg list)
george however at 24 was very impressive, a big guy even by modern standards, but a couple of big wins and two successfull defences dont put you into a top ten all time list in my book, no matter how destructive you were. i could possibly buy someone saying that they rate ali, louis, marciano and holmes above lewis, i might not agree with all of them but i could see the logic, but when people start saying foreman, frazier etc, i think they are just beating up on lennox because they dont like him personally and that is wrong. you would think as part of the criteria you would have at least to be the dominant fighter in your era, how can you be rated in the all time best if you were not the best in your era.
i apologise if i cant get my points over (shipped a few in my time) but i try to look beyond the personality,nationality etc of a fighter when judging him, i hope hand on heart eveyone else is doing the same. if so, fine thats everyones honest opinions.