Lennox Lewis is the GOAT

[gilgamesh]

Well lets start with the obvioius: Ali
His resume
Liston
Patterson,
Frazier
Foreman
Norton

All better than anyone that Lewis beat at the time that Lewis beat them. (Holyfield and Tyson well past it)

Not to mention:
Terrell
Quarry
Ellis
Bonavena
Young
Shavers

Lewis' resume compared to Ali is a joke.
Louis had a better one as well.

Lewis was obviously a great fighter. His is comparable to Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, Holyfield etc.
Better than Ali and Louis? No way.

I wouldn't go so far as calling Lennox's resume a joke, but no Heavyweight has a resume that can compare with Ali's. Nobody really even comes close.

[mayorcurley]

Are we reality to this point?
Never heard anyone having Lewis higher than 3rd.
He is usually in the 6-8 range.
Beating 5 past major beltholders is the argument people are using?

Past it Holyfield,
Shot Tyson
Which leaves us with what, Klitschko, McCall, and Briggs?
Seriously, that's the argument that Lennox Lewis is the best of all time? Wow.

Lennox was never "past it".... still whoopin on high level talent into his late 30s

He beat the following fighters. 7 were MAJOR belt holders.

Holyfield
Tyson
V. Klitschko
Tua
Golota
Ruddock
Morrison
Rahman
McCall
Botha
Briggs
Mercer
Tucker
Bruno
Weaver

He only has 2 losses to which he avenged by knockout.

Other fighters on this list held the WBO title.

George Foreman says Lennox is GOAT

[gilgamesh]

Are we reality to this point?
Never heard anyone having Lewis higher than 3rd.
He is usually in the 6-8 range.
Beating 5 past major beltholders is the argument people are using?

Past it Holyfield,
Shot Tyson
Which leaves us with what, Klitschko, McCall, and Briggs?
Seriously, that's the argument that Lennox Lewis is the best of all time? Wow.

Lennox was never "past it".... still whoopin on high level talent into his late 30s

He beat the following fighters. 7 were MAJOR belt holders.

Holyfield
Tyson
V. Klitschko
Tua
Golota
Ruddock
Morrison
Rahman
McCall
Botha
Briggs
Mercer
Tucker
Bruno
Weaver

He only has 2 losses to which he avenged by knockout.

Other fighters on this list held the WBO title.

George Foreman says Lennox is GOAT

That beating major beltholders argument doesn't amount to much. Back when Boxing had integrity, there wasn't multiple Champions. There was 1.

The Top 10 contenders from those eras were in many cases better than the "Champions" of modern eras.

You're either THE Champion. Or you're a contender with a meaningless belt.

If everybody is a Champion then nobody is a Champion.

That being said, upon beating Holyfield and Briggs, Lennox did indeed establish himself as THE Champion.

Back in the early 90's when he beat Ruddock. He was a Contender with a Belt.

[mayorcurley]

Are we reality to this point?
Never heard anyone having Lewis higher than 3rd.
He is usually in the 6-8 range.
Beating 5 past major beltholders is the argument people are using?

Past it Holyfield,
Shot Tyson
Which leaves us with what, Klitschko, McCall, and Briggs?
Seriously, that's the argument that Lennox Lewis is the best of all time? Wow.

Lennox was never "past it".... still whoopin on high level talent into his late 30s

He beat the following fighters. 7 were MAJOR belt holders.

Holyfield
Tyson
V. Klitschko
Tua
Golota
Ruddock
Morrison
Rahman
McCall
Botha
Briggs
Mercer
Tucker
Bruno
Weaver

He only has 2 losses to which he avenged by knockout.

Other fighters on this list held the WBO title.

George Foreman says Lennox is GOAT

That beating major beltholders argument doesn't amount to much. Back when Boxing had integrity, there wasn't multiple Champions. There was 1.

The Top 10 contenders from those eras were in many cases better than the "Champions" of modern eras.

You're either THE Champion. Or you're a contender with a meaningless belt.

If everybody is a Champion then nobody is a Champion.

That being said, upon beating Holyfield and Briggs, Lennox did indeed establish himself as THE Champion.

Back in the early 90's when he beat Ruddock. He was a Contender with a Belt.

All the other fighters got bested by somebody. Lewis got bested by nobody, fought a very high level of competition, had over 90% win pct and 73% KO pct. Avenged the two mistakes on his record with knockouts. In addition, head to head he is probably the favorite to beat any opponent in his weight class. Does anyone think Ali would beat him 1 on 1?

[gilgamesh]

1 guy thought so in the mythical fights section.

THINKING a guy can beat somebody ain't the same as him doing it.

He did indeed avenge his defeats by KO. The McCall one is a little bizarre though seeing as how McCall was obviously having a mental breakdown during the fight. Lennox didn't so much beat McCall there as McCall beat himself as he was clearly in no condition to even be in a Boxing match.

That being said I have no doubt that even if McCall was prepared Lennox could've beaten him. He wouldn't have stopped him though if not for the fact that he was having a mental breakdown.

[mayorcurley]

Well lets start with the obvioius: Ali
His resume
Liston
Patterson,
Frazier
Foreman
Norton

All better than anyone that Lewis beat at the time that Lewis beat them. (Holyfield and Tyson well past it)

Not to mention:
Terrell
Quarry
Ellis
Bonavena
Young
Shavers

Lewis' resume compared to Ali is a joke.
Louis had a better one as well.

Lewis was obviously a great fighter. His is comparable to Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, Holyfield etc.
Better than Ali and Louis? No way.

I wouldn't go so far as calling Lennox's resume a joke, but no Heavyweight has a resume that can compare with Ali's. Nobody really even comes close.

Ali's resume is VERY impressive. So is Foreman's.

I would say you could argue these 4.....

(Not in any order)
Ali, Louis, Foreman and Lewis

[DrDuke]

Well lets start with the obvioius: Ali
His resume
Liston
Patterson,
Frazier
Foreman
Norton

All better than anyone that Lewis beat at the time that Lewis beat them. (Holyfield and Tyson well past it)

Not to mention:
Terrell
Quarry
Ellis
Bonavena
Young
Shavers

Lewis' resume compared to Ali is a joke.
Louis had a better one as well.

Lewis was obviously a great fighter. His is comparable to Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, Holyfield etc.
Better than Ali and Louis? No way.

When you talk about Lewis, you mention Holyfield and Tyson well past it (although Holyfield wasn't even WELL past it), when you talk about Ali, you don't mention Frazier and Patterson being past it, when Ali defeated them.

While the likes of Terrell, Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena, Young, Shavers are camparable with the likes of Bruno, Mercer, Tua, Morrison, Ruddock, Golota, whom you haven't mention at all. And, of course, you didn't mention Klitschko, who was clearly better, than all these second tier boxers together. But we all know why you act like this.

[Ambling Alp II]

Umm no. Make that hell no.

Patterson (the first time)and Frazier were not past it when Ali beat them. Holyfield was clearly past and Tyson even further. The Holyfield and Tyson wins are worthless. Again the obsession with Klitschko. No he wasn't as good anyone mentioned. Or Ron Lyle for that matter.

At the time that they actually fought their opponents, Lewis never beat anyone close to as good as Foreman. Or Frazier, Or Liston. Or Norton.
When these fights actually took place, Lewis best win (whatever that was) is not as good as Ali's fourth best win.

Louis had wins over Schmeling, Max Baer, Buddy Baer, Walcott; not to mention several other decent wins.

Lewis got stopped twice by less than great opponents in his prime. When you are comparing someone to the real ATGs, those are embarrassing losses. Ali, Louis, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Johnson, Marciano, Holyfield did not have even one loss like this.
Lewis and say Holyfield is a serious argument. Ali is not.

[littlepug]

Umm no. Make that hell no.

Patterson (the first time)and Frazier were not past it when Ali beat them. Holyfield was clearly past and Tyson even further. The Holyfield and Tyson wins are worthless. Again the obsession with Klitschko. No he wasn't as good anyone mentioned. Or Ron Lyle for that matter.

At the time that they actually fought their opponents, Lewis never beat anyone close to as good as Foreman. Or Frazier, Or Liston. Or Norton.
When these fights actually took place, Lewis best win (whatever that was) is not as good as Ali's fourth best win.

Louis had wins over Schmeling, Max Baer, Buddy Baer, Walcott; not to mention several other decent wins.

Lewis got stopped twice by less than great opponents in his prime. When you are comparing someone to the real ATGs, those are embarrassing losses. Ali, Louis, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Johnson, Marciano, Holyfield did not have even one loss like this.
Lewis and say Holyfield is a serious argument. Ali is not.

Yes those 2 losses hurt his legacy, I’ve got him at no 5 behind Foreman, Holmes, Louis and Ali.

[DrDuke]

Patterson (the first time)and Frazier were not past it when Ali beat them.

They weren't. Patterson's prime was over after the Liston losses, Frazier's one after the Foreman loss, arguably even after the Ali win.

Again the obsession with Klitschko. No he wasn't as good anyone mentioned

Klitschko wasn't as good as Terrell, Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena, Young, Shavers? Stop with those drugs of yours.

Lewis got stopped twice by less than great opponents in his prime. When you are comparing someone to the real ATGs, those are embarrassing losses. Ali, Louis, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Johnson, Marciano, Holyfield did not have even one loss like this.

It always seems like you didn't watch any fights featuring these guys, but just looked to the fighter's records.

[Ambling Alp II]

Patterson was very close to his prime. After the Liston fights, he scored some of his best wins. He easily beat Machen, and won a great fight with Chuvalo. Even 6 years after fighting Ali the first time, he was still able to beat Bonavena. He still had s, he was still great hand speed , a great left hook.

Frazier got beat badly by Foreman, but there is little else to suggest that he was past it. He was still beating good fighters and of course had the great fight against Ali in their third fight.

Yeah, I am the one who must be off about the great Vitaly Klitschko. Terrell, Quarry, Ellis, Shavers, Young, and Shavers actually scored big wins in real life. Kitschko didn't do that. It's always, what he would have done against so and so. That doesn't mean anything. Klitschko didn't actually do anything to rate him as good as these guys. Not one big win in his entire career.

You are accusing me of just looking at guys records and not watching fights? wow. I''s not me that has to resort to wins over WBS title holders and number of title defenses to prop someone up. I have only said a bout a million times that win/loss records can very deceiving in boxing.
You have to take into consideration of how good someone was when they were fighting a particular bout.
When Lewis fought Holyfield, Holyfield was clearly past his best. WAs unimpressive in his previous fight against the great Vaughn Bean. Had other unimpressive performances leading up to the Lewis fight.
Tyson had not beat anyone worth mention in several years before fighting Lewis. Their fight was 5 years after he lost to Holyfield. Tyson fought one round against Lewis and then was done.

I have seen almost all of Ali's fights and every meaningful fight of Lewis career. As well as many fights of their opponents. Try watching Ali's fights in his prime. No heavyweight had near his foot work, reflexes or hand speed.
He completely dominated the division during his prime. Past his prime, in the 1970s, he was still the best fighter during the best era in heavyweight boxing.
btw past his best, he beat a prime George Foreman. Lewis has nothing like that.

[DrDuke]

Patterson was very close to his prime. After the Liston fights, he scored some of his best wins. He easily beat Machen, and won a great fight with Chuvalo. Even 6 years after fighting Ali the first time, he was still able to beat Bonavena. He still had s, he was still great hand speed , a great left hook.

You gotta already choose was he in prime or not.

Frazier got beat badly by Foreman, but there is little else to suggest that he was past it. He was still beating good fighters and of course had the great fight against Ali in their third fight.

So what? He shouldn't have beaten good fighters after being past it or what? He was doing it noticeably less convincingly than before, when he had been in prime.

Yeah, I am the one who must be off about the great Vitaly Klitschko. Terrell, Quarry, Ellis, Shavers, Young, and Shavers actually scored big wins in real life. Kitschko didn't do that. It's always, what he would have done against so and so. That doesn't mean anything. Klitschko didn't actually do anything to rate him as good as these guys. Not one big win in his entire career.

Oh my, the opponents defeated by the likes of Bonavena and Shavers are much better than the best fighters of Klitschko's list...

You are accusing me of just looking at guys records and not watching fights? wow. I''s not me that has to resort to wins over WBS title holders and number of title defenses to prop someone up. I have only said a bout a million times that win/loss records can very deceiving in boxing.

Has everyone really talked now about the number of the WBC defences or it's just another you delusion?

I have seen almost all of Ali's fights and every meaningful fight of Lewis career. As well as many fights of their opponents. Try watching Ali's fights in his prime. No heavyweight had near his foot work, reflexes or hand speed.
He completely dominated the division during his prime. Past his prime, in the 1970s, he was still the best fighter during the best era in heavyweight boxing.
btw past his best, he beat a prime George Foreman. Lewis has nothing like that.

Yes, it's well seen how much you are in love with Ali, you can stop describing your hot feelings.

[gilgamesh]

I mean he has the win over Vitali at an age when Ali was going 1-3 in his remaining bouts.

So there's that.

But of course there are many other factors at play there (like the fact that Ali's style doesn't lend itself well to aging. Speed and movement being his biggest assets), and of course Vitali is no George Foreman.

[mayorcurley]

I mean he has the win over Vitali at an age when Ali was going 1-3 in his remaining bouts.

So there's that.

But of course there are many other factors at play there (like the fact that Ali's style doesn't lend itself well to aging. Speed and movement being his biggest assets), and of course Vitali is no George Foreman.

Lennox Lewis was 70s George Foreman if 70s George didn't lose.

Lewis never had to beat the beast because he was the BEAST.

And he beat Holyfield, destroyed Tyson, destroyed Ruddock, destroyed Golota, destroyed Botha, shut out the rugged Tua, blugeoned Rahman, frustrated McCall to tears........

beat Mercer, Briggs, Tucker, Bruno, Weaver

gotta be the most quality resume.

No Leon Spinks, no Chuck Wepner, Rudi Lubbers, no Jean Pierre Coopman on Lennox dance card.

[mayorcurley]

Patterson was very close to his prime. After the Liston fights, he scored some of his best wins. He easily beat Machen, and won a great fight with Chuvalo. Even 6 years after fighting Ali the first time, he was still able to beat Bonavena. He still had s, he was still great hand speed , a great left hook.

Frazier got beat badly by Foreman, but there is little else to suggest that he was past it. He was still beating good fighters and of course had the great fight against Ali in their third fight.

Yeah, I am the one who must be off about the great Vitaly Klitschko. Terrell, Quarry, Ellis, Shavers, Young, and Shavers actually scored big wins in real life. Kitschko didn't do that. It's always, what he would have done against so and so. That doesn't mean anything. Klitschko didn't actually do anything to rate him as good as these guys. Not one big win in his entire career.

You are accusing me of just looking at guys records and not watching fights? wow. I''s not me that has to resort to wins over WBS title holders and number of title defenses to prop someone up. I have only said a bout a million times that win/loss records can very deceiving in boxing.
You have to take into consideration of how good someone was when they were fighting a particular bout.
When Lewis fought Holyfield, Holyfield was clearly past his best. WAs unimpressive in his previous fight against the great Vaughn Bean. Had other unimpressive performances leading up to the Lewis fight.
Tyson had not beat anyone worth mention in several years before fighting Lewis. Their fight was 5 years after he lost to Holyfield. Tyson fought one round against Lewis and then was done.

I have seen almost all of Ali's fights and every meaningful fight of Lewis career. As well as many fights of their opponents. Try watching Ali's fights in his prime. No heavyweight had near his foot work, reflexes or hand speed.
He completely dominated the division during his prime. Past his prime, in the 1970s, he was still the best fighter during the best era in heavyweight boxing.
btw past his best, he beat a prime George Foreman. Lewis has nothing like that.

Lewis doesn't have an opponent like Foreman on his resume because Lewis was the Foreman of the 90s. Except no one got the better of him.

And the 90s is the golden era of the heavyweights.

[Cojimar 1946]

Patterson was very close to his prime. After the Liston fights, he scored some of his best wins. He easily beat Machen, and won a great fight with Chuvalo. Even 6 years after fighting Ali the first time, he was still able to beat Bonavena. He still had s, he was still great hand speed , a great left hook.

Frazier got beat badly by Foreman, but there is little else to suggest that he was past it. He was still beating good fighters and of course had the great fight against Ali in their third fight.

Yeah, I am the one who must be off about the great Vitaly Klitschko. Terrell, Quarry, Ellis, Shavers, Young, and Shavers actually scored big wins in real life. Kitschko didn't do that. It's always, what he would have done against so and so. That doesn't mean anything. Klitschko didn't actually do anything to rate him as good as these guys. Not one big win in his entire career.

You are accusing me of just looking at guys records and not watching fights? wow. I''s not me that has to resort to wins over WBS title holders and number of title defenses to prop someone up. I have only said a bout a million times that win/loss records can very deceiving in boxing.
You have to take into consideration of how good someone was when they were fighting a particular bout.
When Lewis fought Holyfield, Holyfield was clearly past his best. WAs unimpressive in his previous fight against the great Vaughn Bean. Had other unimpressive performances leading up to the Lewis fight.
Tyson had not beat anyone worth mention in several years before fighting Lewis. Their fight was 5 years after he lost to Holyfield. Tyson fought one round against Lewis and then was done.

I have seen almost all of Ali's fights and every meaningful fight of Lewis career. As well as many fights of their opponents. Try watching Ali's fights in his prime. No heavyweight had near his foot work, reflexes or hand speed.
He completely dominated the division during his prime. Past his prime, in the 1970s, he was still the best fighter during the best era in heavyweight boxing.
btw past his best, he beat a prime George Foreman. Lewis has nothing like that.

Floyd Patterson beating Bonavena at that stage in his career is hardly proof he was still close to his prime. He had been in a tremendous number of tough fights at that stage. Rather than evidence Patterson was still close to his best it might be more an indictment of Bonavena. Many people felt Holyfield beat Valuev in 2008. Surely the 2008 Holyfield wasn't prime.

[gilgamesh]

I mean he has the win over Vitali at an age when Ali was going 1-3 in his remaining bouts.

So there's that.

But of course there are many other factors at play there (like the fact that Ali's style doesn't lend itself well to aging. Speed and movement being his biggest assets), and of course Vitali is no George Foreman.

Lennox Lewis was 70s George Foreman if 70s George didn't lose.

Lewis never had to beat the beast because he was the BEAST.

And he beat Holyfield, destroyed Tyson, destroyed Ruddock, destroyed Golota, destroyed Botha, shut out the rugged Tua, blugeoned Rahman, frustrated McCall to tears........

beat Mercer, Briggs, Tucker, Bruno, Weaver

gotta be the most quality resume.

No Leon Spinks, no Chuck Wepner, Rudi Lubbers, no Jean Pierre Coopman on Lennox dance card.

McCall was having a mental breakdown. If you think that was because of Lennox you're an idiot. He clearly had some kinda issues coming into the fight that night.

Lewis' resume is excellent. He's one of the Top Heavyweights of all time. He's not the best. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

You act as if Lewis never had an easy opponent. That's ridiculous.

He does always get major credit for avenging his losses.

The Tyson he destroyed, never won another meaningful fight, and in fact went 1-2 after losing to Lewis. He only actually put a fight against Lewis for 1 round, and then he was just a punching bag with a name.

[mayorcurley]

Haters can't admit Lenox is the GOAT because he's British.

The man destroyed everybody. Beat the crap out of HOFers Holyfield and Tyson three times!!!!!

Greatest Heavy is from Britain. Americans must accept it.

[Jan]

George Foreman called everyone the GOAT: Frazier, Ali, Louis , Lewis...

i think Lewis is the best of his Generation. if hes the GOAT I dont know, but ist possible, but it could also be Holmes for example.

[Ambling Alp II]

He might have been the best of his generation; I think Holyfield was, certainly arguable. Has nothing to do with him being British. American fans usually don't care. Most of wanted him to beat Tyson.

What universe are we living in in regard to fighter's primes?
Tyson was basically shot by the time he fought Lewis. Had not beaten any decent in what, 7 years?
Holyfield was what, 70% of what he once was?

When Ali fought Patterson, Patterson, Patterson was 29 years ago. He had recently beaten Machen and Chuvalo. He was good enough to beat Bonavena 6 years later, he obviously had to have a lot left when he fought Ali. Look at the film of Patterson in his last few fight before he fought Ali.
What is the evidence that Frazier was all of sudden washed up? Because he lost to George Foreman? He was still just 30. Had not taken that punishment. Had beaten Quarry and Ellis between their 2nd and 3rd fights. Watch the Ali-Frazier fights. He obviously was still a great fighter.

I guess every thread has to be Vitaly Klitschko. Now it's comparing his wins against Bonavena and Shavers. Well Bonavena beat Chuvalo and Mildenberger. Might not seem that awesome, but it 's better than what the stiffs that Klitschko beat.
Look at the losses. Bonavena looked a lot better against Ali and Frazier than Klitschko did against Byrd and Lewis.

Shavers had wins over Young, Ellis, Norton, and Bugner. Obviously not all in their primes, still much better than anything Klitschko ever did.

Lewis lost to Rahman and McCall in his prime. Ali had nothing like that in his prime.
The best win for Lewis (whatever that supposed to be) is not as good as Ali's fourth best win.
This is a slam dunk. Ali was better than Lewis. Clearly better.

[DrDuke]

When Ali fought Patterson, Patterson, Patterson was 29 years ago. He had recently beaten Machen and Chuvalo. He was good enough to beat Bonavena 6 years later, he obviously had to have a lot left when he fought Ali. Look at the film of Patterson in his last few fight before he fought Ali.

You like so much to point at fighter's ages when talking about primes, as if it's always the same. What a narrow minded move. Tyson wasn't even 25, when he was already declined.

What is the evidence that Frazier was all of sudden washed up? Because he lost to George Foreman? He was still just 30. Had not taken that punishment. Had beaten Quarry and Ellis between their 2nd and 3rd fights. Watch the Ali-Frazier fights. He obviously was still a great fighter.

Here again. And no one called Frazier washed up. A fighter can be declined to different extents FFS. Holy sh!t, are you that silly or you're trolling us all? Conversations with you are terrible, you are in your own world.

I guess every thread has to be Vitaly Klitschko. Now it's comparing his wins against Bonavena and Shavers. Well Bonavena beat Chuvalo and Mildenberger. Might not seem that awesome, but it 's better than what the stiffs that Klitschko beat.
Look at the losses. Bonavena looked a lot better against Ali and Frazier than Klitschko did against Byrd and Lewis.

That's a cherry on this pie of delirium.

[matchstick]

Klitschko was outpointing Byrd by wide margin until he separated his shoulder. He was just about shutting out Byrd.

[matchstick]

He might have been the best of his generation; I think Holyfield was, certainly arguable. Has nothing to do with him being British. American fans usually don't care. Most of wanted him to beat Tyson.

What universe are we living in in regard to fighter's primes?
Tyson was basically shot by the time he fought Lewis. Had not beaten any decent in what, 7 years?
Holyfield was what, 70% of what he once was?

When Ali fought Patterson, Patterson, Patterson was 29 years ago. He had recently beaten Machen and Chuvalo. He was good enough to beat Bonavena 6 years later, he obviously had to have a lot left when he fought Ali. Look at the film of Patterson in his last few fight before he fought Ali.
What is the evidence that Frazier was all of sudden washed up? Because he lost to George Foreman? He was still just 30. Had not taken that punishment. Had beaten Quarry and Ellis between their 2nd and 3rd fights. Watch the Ali-Frazier fights. He obviously was still a great fighter.

I guess every thread has to be Vitaly Klitschko. Now it's comparing his wins against Bonavena and Shavers. Well Bonavena beat Chuvalo and Mildenberger. Might not seem that awesome, but it 's better than what the stiffs that Klitschko beat.
Look at the losses. Bonavena looked a lot better against Ali and Frazier than Klitschko did against Byrd and Lewis.

Shavers had wins over Young, Ellis, Norton, and Bugner. Obviously not all in their primes, still much better than anything Klitschko ever did.

Lewis lost to Rahman and McCall in his prime. Ali had nothing like that in his prime.
The best win for Lewis (whatever that supposed to be) is not as good as Ali's fourth best win.
This is a slam dunk. Ali was better than Lewis. Clearly better.

Holyfield and Tyson are better than anyone on Ali's list of wins.

Holyfield
Tyson
Klitschko

are better than

Liston
Frazier
Foreman

Klitschko was ahead on points on ALL CARDS against Lennox Lewis and Chris Byrd.

Vitali was stopped on cuts vs Lewis but giving Lewis a brutal war.

Vitali was coasting to an easy win vs Byrd but he separated his shoulder and could not go out for tenth.

Vitaly was winning both fights but Bonavena was doing better?

[Ambling Alp II]

Not sure how long you have followed the sport, but there are some things you are not taking into consideration"

Holyfield and Tyson were nowhere near the fighters that they once were when Lewis beat them. You have to take that into consideration. If you don't then you have to give Kevin McBride and Danny Williams credit for beating Tyson. If they can do it, then it is not a big deal for Lewis to have done it.

Same with Holyfield. He lost to Ruiz, Toney, Byrd, etc. when he was past it. So it should not be a big deal for Lewis to have done it.
So no, the wisn over Tyson and Holyfield aren't as impressive as Ali's wins over Liston, Frazier, and Foreman. Not remotely close.
Ali's wins were clearly better. didn't have two embarrassing losses in his prime.

[matchstick]

Not sure how long you have followed the sport, but there are some things you are not taking into consideration"

Holyfield and Tyson were nowhere near the fighters that they once were when Lewis beat them. You have to take that into consideration. If you don't then you have to give Kevin McBride and Danny Williams credit for beating Tyson. If they can do it, then it is not a big deal for Lewis to have done it.

Same with Holyfield. He lost to Ruiz, Toney, Byrd, etc. when he was past it. So it should not be a big deal for Lewis to have done it.
So no, the wisn over Tyson and Holyfield aren't as impressive as Ali's wins over Liston, Frazier, and Foreman. Not remotely close.
Ali's wins were clearly better. didn't have two embarrassing losses in his prime.

This is just subjective opinion.

Lewis losses are not embarrassing. McCall and Rahman are quality accomplished heavyweights. And impressively Lewis avenged them both.

I think Ali should be embarrassed losing to Leon Spinks.

Rahman and McCall are superior fighters to lots of Ali's opponents.

Rahman and McCall are superior to most people on Ali's list.

Lewis has better opponents. Ali won some big names then after that the list is basic.

Tyson is just as good as Liston. Holyfield is just as good as Frazier. Vitali K is right up there too.

Then you gonna tell me Ernie Terrell is as good as Mercer, Tua, Ruddock, Golota.

The 90s heavyweights are mostly superior athletes and better boxers.