Lennox Lewis' legacy?

[Heartbreak_Kid79]

Absolutely nothing you wrote rebuts the fact that Holyfield was an old man. Nothing.

To rattle of a bunch of ABC titlists who grabbed belts in the post Lewis/Holyfield/Tyson/Bowe vacuum only shows how poor the division became as the last great cycle grew too old to box. Ruslan Chagaev . . . Jesus Christ.

That list was about age.... not specifically talent. 36 is not ancient for a heavyweight... heck the Ring (ridiculously) ranked Evander #3 HW of all time and top 3 P4P in the world leading into the first Lewis fight. Not bad for an old man huh?

If Evander was past it at 36, why was he so heavily favoured to beat Lewis beforehand? And it was only 18 months after he handled Tyson.

In 1996 Lewis would have beaten Tyson.... but Evander was so well connected he got the chance first.

[orbtastic]

He got the chance off the fact he looked eminently beatable after a run of poor performances.

[Tuan_Jim]

That list was about age.... not specifically talent. 36 is not ancient for a heavyweight... heck the Ring (ridiculously) ranked Evander #3 HW of all time and top 3 P4P in the world leading into the first Lewis fight. Not bad for an old man huh?

If Evander was past it at 36, why was he so heavily favoured to beat Lewis beforehand? And it was only 18 months after he handled Tyson.

In 1996 Lewis would have beaten Tyson.... but Evander was so well connected he got the chance first.

Do I really have to educate you about the boxing scene of 1999? Lewis was lowly regarded in America, particularly after the Mavrovic scare. Holyfield, while old, was The Man, and with a long history of upsets and rising to the occasion. There was a suspicion he was waning because of his age and because of the Bean fight. His performance in the ring versus Lennox Lewis in March confirmed those suspicions. He certainly rose to the occasion for the rematch, and I thought won, but it wasn't the same force that battled Bowe, Foreman, Dokes, Mercer, Tyson, and Moorer the second time.

The idea of the Lewis of 1996, who couldn't get out of the way of Mercer's attacks, being a lock to beat Tyson, is a very curious one.

[Heartbreak_Kid79]

Lewis was lowly regarded in America, particularly after the Mavrovic scare.

Did Lewis demolition jobs of Ruddock and Golota go unnoticed?

He certainly rose to the occasion for the rematch, and I thought won

Holyfield was better than the first fight but didn't win. A wave of nostalga for American fans

The idea of the Lewis of 1996, who couldn't get out of the way of Mercer's attacks, being a lock to beat Tyson, is a very curious one.

Tyson thought enough of Lewis to vacate the WBC title rather than face him.

[Tuan_Jim]

Lewis was lowly regarded in America, particularly after the Mavrovic scare.

Did Lewis demolition jobs of Ruddock and Golota go unnoticed? .

You tell me mate, as you keep pointing out, Holyfield was the favourite despite Lewis's bombing Ruddock and Golota.

The idea of the Lewis of 1996, who couldn't get out of the way of Mercer's attacks, being a lock to beat Tyson, is a very curious one.

Tyson thought enough of Lewis to vacate the WBC title rather than face him.

That was boxing politics, not a fear of Lewis. The reasons and grand plan for Tyson vacating the WBC belt in 1996 was covered extensively in the print media at the time. If you don't have any of that, then the exact reasons for vacating have been discussed innumerable times, ad infinitum, right here on this forum. You won't have to search too far to find out why Tyson vacated, it wasn't because of any fear of Lennox Lewis, who the world had just watched having his face rearranged by Ray Mercer.

[Heartbreak_Kid79]

Prime Lewis beats a prime Holyfield. Too big, too strong, too skilled.

I'm not saying Evander wasn't a great fighter, but even in his HW prime, his win-loss record was spotty in the sense that he never put more than a handful of defences together.

As I said before Evander was very well connected in terms of getting title shots:

Lost to Bowe: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match
Lost to Moorer: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match
Lost to Bowe 2: Gets a shot at Tyson in his 2nd comeback match
Lost to Lewis: Gets a WBA title match in his very next match
Lost to Ibragimov: Gets a WBA title match in his very next match at Valuev

Evander was always in the right place at the right time, Mr King was very generous

[Tuan_Jim]

Lost to Bowe: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match
Lost to Moorer: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match
Lost to Bowe 2: Gets a shot at Tyson in his 2nd comeback match
Lost to Lewis: Gets a WBA title match in his very next match
Lost to Ibragimov: Gets a WBA title match in his very next match at Valuev

Evander was always in the right place at the right time, Mr King was very generous

Your facts are so off it's obvious you weren't following boxing and have done no research on this subject. Holyfield wasn't even a Don King fighter for half the fights you list, which undermines the silly underhand shenanigans you imply.

The first thing I should say is that Evander Holyfield got title shots because he was a box office superstar who always gave his all in thrilling fights and, because of that, generated tens of millions of dollars. I'm surprised you can't understand this. Actually no, I'm not surprised at all.

Lost to Bowe: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match. Holyfield/Bowe 1 was hailed as one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in decades. It was a huge fight, and Holyfield more than earned a rematch in his heroic defeat. He was hardly bombed out with 1 punch, like some other heavyweight champs.

Lost to Moorer: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match. You are wrong. Holyfield/Bowe III was a non-title fight. Holyfield wasn't interested in Bowe's WBO belt, therefore it was not on the line. Holyfield took this fight because Don King had Tyson and all the belts. It was a huge fight and both men were given credit for taking it, given the lack of title. It was for prestige.

Lost to Bowe 2: Gets a shot at Tyson in his 2nd comeback match. You actually mean Bowe 3, but anyway. Holyfield got a Tyson shot because he was an icon, big box office - go check the PPV figures. Whether Holyfield was deserving of the shot, well . . . the fight speaks for itself.

Lost to Lewis: Gets a WBA title match in his very next match. Blame Lennox Lewis. Had Lewis defended against John Ruiz rather than vacated his WBA belt, Holyfield wouldn't have got this shot. As for who should fight Ruiz for the vacant title, are you seriously suggesting there was anyone more deserving than Holyfield, who had lost a razor-thin decision to Lewis in his last match?

This is such basic stuff. How do you not know this? Ibragimov, Valuev, these fights were down to Holyfield being the last superstar standing in an awful era of low public interest. These are nothing fights, cynical money grasping exercises. To fail to understand Holyfield's superstar status, his thrilling fights and assume a promoter he wasn't signed with until he was 34 manufactured his career is hilariously misinformed. And as for his record being "spotty", in comparison to who? Holyfield was fighting the elite, often multiple times, for the whole decade. Bowe, Lewis, Tyson cannot claim the same. It's hard to point out the bad names on Holyfield's record 1990-1999. Cooper? Sub for a sub for Tyson. Bean? Mandatory forced on him. After that, who do you have? And who did Lewis beat 1990-99 that Holyfield wouldn't have? Morrison? Bruno? Golota? Mercer? Holyfield decked him and won a clear decision. What did Mercer do with Lewis next time out?

Who fights Douglas, Foreman, Bowe thrice, Moorer twice, Mercer, and Tyson twice and comes out spotless? Certainly not Lennox Lewis who was struggling with Bruno, McCall, and, in life & death, Mercer.

[Heartbreak_Kid79]

The first thing I should say is that Evander Holyfield got title shots because he was a box office superstar who always gave his all in thrilling fights and, because of that, generated tens of millions of dollars .

Thats exactly my point, just because a guy is popular doesn't mean he is more deserving than the top ranked contenders.
Evander got chance after chance because of who he is.

Lost to Bowe: Gets another shot in his 2nd comeback match. Holyfield/Bowe 1 was hailed as one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in decades. It was a huge fight, and Holyfield more than earned a rematch in his heroic defeat. .

This one is fair enough

Lost to Bowe 2: Gets a shot at Tyson in his 2nd comeback match. You actually mean Bowe 3, but anyway. Holyfield got a Tyson shot because he was an icon, big box office - go check the PPV figures. Whether Holyfield was deserving of the shot, well . . . the fight speaks for itself. .

No re-read it. Lost to Bowe 2 That refers to his 2nd loss to Bowe, not their 2nd match.

Lost to Lewis: Gets a WBA title match in his very next match. Blame Lennox Lewis. .

I'm sure you do blame Lennox.
Surely Evander could have had a couple of warm up fights first?.... having an immediate rematch after losing a title I can understand, but losing the title, and then having another title shot with somebody else in his very next match? This is because its Evander, if it would have been say Michael Moorer would he have been given this immediate opportunity?

Ibragimov, Valuev, these fights were down to Holyfield being the last superstar standing in an awful era of low public interest.

Exactly my point, he was granted them on popularity and not on merit. Because its Holyfield... hey lets give him another title shot! we want to build him into a 5 time world champion for the sake of history.

It's hard to point out the bad names on Holyfield's record 1990-1999. Cooper? Sub for a sub for Tyson. Bean? Mandatory forced on him. After that, who do you have?

Not disputing Evanders achievements at Cruiserweights. I've never brought that into this argument.
But in his first HW reign.... Foreman & Holmes were great names but both in their 40s. It could well have been a different outcome if that was their primes.
Cooper had already lost 7 pro fights BEFORE he even boxed Evander.

And his subsequent reigns, he never put a good run of defences together....
In 4 title reigns he made only 7 successful defences (one of which was the Lewis draw, that Evander really lost)
That is why I referenced his record to being spotty... win, win, loss, win, loss.

And who did Lewis beat 1990-99 that Holyfield wouldn't have? Morrison? Bruno? Golota? Mercer? Holyfield decked him and won a clear decision. What did Mercer do with Lewis next time out?

Golota was seen as a dangerous opponent in 1997. Though he was DQ'd, he was dominating Riddick Bowe in both fights.
Lewis destroyed him in 90 seconds.
And turning the tables.... looking at Evanders HW title fights, who would beat Lewis?
Bowe wanted no piece of him and vacated his WBC title (worried that a pro fight would end up the way the '88 Olympics went). Tyson was not the fighter he was in the 80s.
Lennox would have boxed cautiously against the older versions of Foreman/Holmes and boxed to a UD.

Who fights Douglas, Foreman, Bowe thrice, Moorer twice, Mercer, and Tyson twice and comes out spotless? Certainly not Lennox Lewis who was struggling with Bruno, McCall, and, in life & death, Mercer.

Evander looked hurt when Bowe KO'd him. And being outboxed by Moorer (1994) is nothing to write home about.


I'm just having fun watching you bite!
I do think Evander is a great fighter.... but he was very fortunate to be granted so many opportunities.
When Lewis lost his first title he was frozen out of the title picture for 3 years. (Before you say anything about Rahman, it took a legal fight to get a rematch).

Evander kept getting chance after chance and immediate opportunities without having to climb the ladder again.
Because of his American hero status rather than on merit

[orbtastic]

I think a lot of people forget just how much Evander was criticised for his performances after winning the title the first time.

[Tuan_Jim]

Going round in circles with the bright spark who names himself after a WWF wrestler. Agreeing with my points that refute his points that he then spins into proving his points. Serpentine.

Me: 'Cooper was a bad opponent yes, but Cooper was a sub for sub for Tyson.'
Him: 'Cooper lost 7 pro fights before he boxed Holyfield! What a bad opponent!'
Me: That's what I said . . .

Etc etc.

You're either incredibly dim, or are desperately grasping for ways to conceal the clear ignorance you displayed in your first post. Nothing you criticise Holyfield for is logical in a boxing or business sense.

[HomicideHenry]

I always loved Holyfield... but the facts don't lie... we all knew, sooner or later, his size would come into play (badly) in the heavyweight division. Against men who were 220 pounds, he had no issues--- minus Moorer anyways. Factor in guys who were naturally 6'4" and 240 pounds and better, with genuine skills, Holyfield was game and had his moments, but it was just too much for him.

He's an all-time great, and one of the few heavyweights I could name who probably would of given a prime Ali a hell of a time in the ring--- but against monster sized heavyweights with ability, he wouldn't stand much of a chance. An older, slower, Foreman hit Holyfield harder than anyone else ever did. While the fight wasn't even close, could you imagine what the prime Foreman could have done, or would of done? And prime Foreman wasn't near as big as Bowe or Lewis.

Eventually you are going to hit a brick wall... so I agree with Lennox Lewis, when he said "I would of beaten Holyfield a hundred out of a hundred," because of the size difference. Both men were of equal skill and ability--- but the size was just too much. It was our version, in a sense, of Wills and Langford. Langford was greater in the p4p sense, but just couldnt do jack with the much larger, equally skilled Wills.

[Jan]

It hink Lewis is the most sucesfull HW of his time. He beat Tua, Tyson, Holy, Vitali and he beat everyone he faced. He is one of the best hws ever.

[Heartbreak_Kid79]

Going round in circles with the bright spark who names himself after a WWF wrestler.

Your a wrestler hater too?

Me:]'Cooper was a bad opponent yes, but Cooper was a sub for sub for Tyson[/i].'
Him: 'Cooper lost 7 pro fights before he boxed Holyfield! What a bad opponent!'
Me: That's what I said . . .

Stop being an Idiot. I'm not making it personal.

You're either incredibly dim, or are desperately grasping for ways to conceal the clear ignorance you displayed in your first post. Nothing you criticise Holyfield for is logical in a boxing or business sense.

So Holyfield wasn't fortunate to be granted so many title opportunities when he was at times, on losing streaks? You said yourself it was because of his box office status. I'm arguing it should be on merit.

And your arguments about Lewis are 100% logical? You dismiss his achievements like he's a bum. He was in fact a highly skilled HW.

[Tuan_Jim]

Holyfield was granted title opportunities because he deserved them. I'm not talking about him when he was 40+ and getting title fights on fame rather than merit because that's just what happens in all of boxing, across the board, through history. Lennox Lewis could get a title shot at Wladimir Klitschko now if he wanted it. That's boxing - or at least the state of the division since Lewis retired in 2004.

To reiterate. Holyfield fully deserved his rematch with Bowe. He deserved a fight with Ruiz for the WBA belt, given that the belt was vacated by Lewis. In 1996 however he was fed to Tyson. But if you have to scan an entire decade of a man's prime to find an example of him 'not totally deserving' a title fight then your argument obviously doesn't stand up - particularly when the man in question crushed the champion.

Finally, did Lennox Lewis deserve a final eliminator versus Razor Ruddock off the back of wins over Mike Dixon and Levi Billups? Did Lewis deserve a final eliminator versus Lionel Butler when he had just been KOd in 2 rounds? It's hardly the epic sporting theatre of Bowe/Holyfield I, is it?

[Heartbreak_Kid79]

To reiterate. Holyfield fully deserved his rematch with Bowe. He deserved a fight with Ruiz for the WBA belt, given that the belt was vacated by Lewis. In 1996 however he was fed to Tyson. But if you have to scan an entire decade of a man's prime to find an example of him 'not totally deserving' a title fight then your argument obviously doesn't stand up - particularly when the man in question crushed the champion.

Yes I would agree with Bowe rematch. However its the frequency of the immediate shots Evander had... it was preferential treatment.

Against Ruiz? I would disagree. Evander could have worked a couple of warm up fights first... but gets the title shot because of who he is.

The title shot at Valuev was ludricous.... though he gave a game effort there is no way Evander deserved the title shot, especially coming up short in a WBO title loss... in wait for it... his PREVIOUS FIGHT!

Finally, did Lennox Lewis deserve a final eliminator versus Razor Ruddock off the back of wins over Mike Dixon and Levi Billups? Did Lewis deserve a final eliminator versus Lionel Butler when he had just been KOd in 2 rounds? It's hardly the epic sporting theatre of Bowe/Holyfield I, is it?

Lewis was ranked in the Top 10 from 1991. He'd worked his way up the rankings and was genuinely in the top 5 by the time he demolished Ruddock. He'd also beaten (and retired) Gary Mason along the way, who was then an unbeaten top 10 HW in 1991.

Butler was his comeback fight. Forget the title eliminator status. It took another 2 years for Lennox to get a title shot after that bout, also facing Morrison and Mercer in between.
Lennox was frozen out of the title picture for nearly 3 years.
Yet Evander would get an immediate, or almost immediate title shot. Within 6 months to a year. Finally catch my drift?

Now imagine if Lewis could have fought Bowe in 1993 as intended.... Lewis gets the win that Evander got. Or Lewis beating the (faded already) Tyson of 1996. I see Lennox winning both.
Those fights fell through due to politics or now wanting to fight him at the time.... Evander slips in instead and gains all the plaudits for being in the right place at the right time.... due to his strong connections.
Lewis was frozen out of the picture due to no fault of his own.

Then when Lewis beats Evander he seemingly gets no credit.... oh Evander suddenly turned old overnight.
Evander was ring worn at 36... but he could still go. It wasn't the Evander we saw getting beaten by nobodys in his 40s.


As for the topic question... I would put both Lennox and Evander hovering around the #10 or #11 spots

[drunkenpiper36]

He's top 10 for me and I can even see an argument for top five. He medaled in two olympics, defeated every professional he ever fought, had some destructive performances and beat a lot of quality heavyweights. He suffered some devastating defeats to lesser men, but avenged them both. And one of those defeats came at the age of 35 while the other before he had polished up his game and may even have been a premature stoppage.

[cjdragon]

Lennox Lewis was very good
That's his legacy in my opinion. A Hall of Fame Heavyweight Champion. :)

[elmersalsa]

Lennox Lewis WAS NOTHING GREAT TO BE HIGH ABOUT. He came at the right time after the greats Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson were not in their primes anymore. I do not even have him in the top 10 heavyweights. Neither in the top 100 greatest fighters pound per pound of all time. Those two losses with those two BUMS destroyed his legacy.

[HomicideHenry]

Lennox Lewis WAS NOTHING GREAT TO BE HIGH ABOUT. He came at the right time after the greats Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson were not in their primes anymore. I do not even have him in the top 10 heavyweights. Neither in the top 100 greatest fighters pound per pound of all time. Those two losses with those two BUMS destroyed his legacy.

I was never a Lewis fan, but the criticisms are harsh... by the logic that he fought in a horrible era or a weak one... then we must, then, eliminate the likes of Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Holmes, and several others from being "good/great" champions... you can't help being in the era that you're in... It's what you do and how you did it, that matters... As for the "top 100 greatest fighters pound per pound of all time" thats a mythical list, and to be quite honest how many pure heavyweights can you name being on that list anyways?... The only real argument you have is that he lost to two bums; but the pundits will point out, he also avenged those losses, so the slate was wiped clean.

Do I think Lewis could of beaten a prime Holyfield or Tyson? I don't think so. If Lewis went the full route twice, in competitive bouts, with the older and slower version of Holyfield--- and was knocked goofy in the first round in the Tyson fight--- then I have to assume that in their primes, they would of beaten Lewis. However, you can't over look the fact that outside of Bowe, Ruiz and Byrd, Lewis essentially fought every man of note of his era and beat them decisively. He did what was expected of a 6'5"+ 250+ heavyweight with an 85" reach.

The one thing I notice with Lewis, is unlike most heavyweight champions, he seemed to get better with age. He was like Walcott in that sense. He became more fluid, and more dominate as the years went on. It was his complacency and mindset--- ego and attitude overall--- that held him back and made him look either ridiculous or weak at times. Then again--- Holmes would look like sh!t from time to time to against men he shouldn't have--- and was all because of ego and attitude.

[elmersalsa]

Lennox Lewis WAS NOTHING GREAT TO BE HIGH ABOUT. He came at the right time after the greats Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson were not in their primes anymore. I do not even have him in the top 10 heavyweights. Neither in the top 100 greatest fighters pound per pound of all time. Those two losses with those two BUMS destroyed his legacy.

I was never a Lewis fan, but the criticisms are harsh... by the logic that he fought in a horrible era or a weak one... then we must, then, eliminate the likes of Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Holmes, and several others from being "good/great" champions... you can't help being in the era that you're in... It's what you do and how you did it, that matters... As for the "top 100 greatest fighters pound per pound of all time" thats a mythical list, and to be quite honest how many pure heavyweights can you name being on that list anyways?... The only real argument you have is that he lost to two bums; but the pundits will point out, he also avenged those losses, so the slate was wiped clean.

Do I think Lewis could of beaten a prime Holyfield or Tyson? I don't think so. If Lewis went the full route twice, in competitive bouts, with the older and slower version of Holyfield--- and was knocked goofy in the first round in the Tyson fight--- then I have to assume that in their primes, they would of beaten Lewis. However, you can't over look the fact that outside of Bowe, Ruiz and Byrd, Lewis essentially fought every man of note of his era and beat them decisively. He did what was expected of a 6'5"+ 250+ heavyweight with an 85" reach.

The one thing I notice with Lewis, is unlike most heavyweight champions, he seemed to get better with age. He was like Walcott in that sense. He became more fluid, and more dominate as the years went on. It was his complacency and mindset--- ego and attitude overall--- that held him back and made him look either ridiculous or weak at times. Then again--- Holmes would look like sh!t from time to time to against men he shouldn't have--- and was all because of ego and attitude.

SORRY, BUT HE DOES NOT MAKE THE TOP 100, even if the top 100 list is MYTHICAL. Too many great champions and legends did not make it in my opinion that were clearly better than he was. He JUST PICKED UP where Tyson and Holyfield LEFT OFF. Just like Jay Z picked up where Biggie and Tupac left off in the rap game. That is all to it with Lennox Lewis. He is not a top 10 all time heavyweight in my view, neither a top 100 p4p fighter. His two losses with BUMS is a great example that he really was not that good. I cannot see him beat a prime great like Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson nor a Evander Holyfield. But I could see in a way these guys beating each other in any given night.

I cannot imagine a prime Holyfield, Tyson, Frazier or Foreman or Ali losing to a bum like Oliver McCall or Hasim Rahman. Nor less I could not view them being get knocked out by these bums.

[bigcheese]

He has to be in the 5-10 spot for me. You can pick apart any heavyweights resume not named Ali or Holyfield. Larry Holmes is universally considered to be a top 5 all time great and what are his 3 best wins? norton, cooney and shavers? I would pick Old Holyfield, Tua, and vitaly to beat those 3 in that order.