What if Lewis had retired undefeated?

monkeybusiness · Post by **monkeybusiness** » 26 Nov 2006, 14:31

It was easily in Lewis's capability to have retired undefeated. If he had turned in rematch type performances against Rahman and McCall and finished with a record of, say 40-0-1, how would it affect his standing?
I have him toward the back of my heavyweight all time top ten, but would probably have to notch him up to about top 5 or 6.

barry · Post by **barry** » 26 Nov 2006, 15:10

If he had retired undefeated then he would not have been knocked out by two, less than stellar, heavyweights and even I would have to look at him in a different light, but that didn't happen, so nothing changes...Plus Lewis didn't really beat McCall...McCall was a basket case in that bout, at times never even covering up, and even then Lewis could not stop him...if anything that bout looks bad on Lewis being that he could not put away an opponent that helped him in every way he could to get it done, but Lewis till was not able to. Now the Rahman rematch is a different story, but the McCall rematch was a farce!

TheRiverCityHippy · Post by **TheRiverCityHippy** » 26 Nov 2006, 17:46

barry wrote:If he had retired undefeated then he would not have been knocked out by two, less than stellar, heavyweights and even I would have to look at him in a different light, but that didn't happen, so nothing changes...Plus Lewis didn't really beat McCall...McCall was a basket case in that bout, at times never even covering up, and even then Lewis could not stop him...if anything that bout looks bad on Lewis being that he could not put away an opponent that helped him in every way he could to get it done, but Lewis till was not able to. Now the Rahman rematch is a different story, but the McCall rematch was a farce!

i dunno, you seem to be questioning his power there barry but there`s a few heavyweights out there that could testify to the fact he`s got a good punch. a very good punch infact.

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 26 Nov 2006, 17:57

Barry, You can't fault Lennox because McCall was a crackhead... But I agree it should not count as a legitimate victory.

Props to Lennox for trying to avenge his loss, though.

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 26 Nov 2006, 18:00

I fail to see how Lewis could be criticised for what happened with McCall in their rematch. Most of the time Lewis was standing back and holding off because McCall was acting so bizarrely. I'm sure that for most of that fight Lewis was expecting the ref or McCalls corner to pull him out. Standing off was the right thing to do in that situation. There was nothing to be gained by hammering someone who couldn't defend himself, it would have only tarnished Lewis' reputation.

monkeybusiness · Post by **monkeybusiness** » 26 Nov 2006, 18:29

I guess there's another side of the argument, that in losing you see something of a fighters character. I think it says a lot that Lewis was able to come back twice against the guys who knocked him out-the Rahman rematch was brutal. But, as it was within his capability of retiring undefeated, he hasnt anyone to blame. I think, rather than having a bit of a dodgy chin, Lewis's greatest weakness was complacency.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 26 Nov 2006, 19:48

monkeybusiness wrote:It was easily in Lewis's capability to have retired undefeated how would it affect his standing?

Certainly it would be improved...just like Tyson's would be if he retired in 1989, or Frazier's would be if he retired after Ali I & before Foreman, or Holmes would be if he retired right before Spinks, etc...(I only mention Holmes because the media would proclaim the undefeated record as proof of greatness, he didn't fall from ATG status losing to Spinks at age 35-36 as far as I'm concerned...)

Diamond WEAPON · Post by **Diamond WEAPON** » 26 Nov 2006, 20:14

Well for Lewis to have retired undefeated he would've had to have done it at age 29 after only having the title for about a year (how long he had it before McCall KO's him) so it's hardly what anyone would call an amazing career. I think being beaten only to come back better than before only helps bolster his standing though, cause virtually every fighter has a loss or two no matter how great, how they come back from them can say quite a bit about them though.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 26 Nov 2006, 21:58

Decagon wrote:What if Lennox Lewis was white? I bet he'd be ranked as the #1 heavyweight of all time.

Why?...he still wouldn't be able to beat the 'real' Louis, Ali, Holmes, Liston, etc.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 26 Nov 2006, 22:19

Lewis only real big win would still be Holyfield -- unless you consider Holyfield "overrated", of course, in which case Lewis has NO real big win. One big win is not enough for a top 5 rating.

At the same time, the losses to McCall and Rahman don't affect my ranking of Lewis much. It's clear that he didn't take these figthers seriously and that he fought way beyond par in either bout. A well prepared, focused LL beats any version of McCall or Rahman.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 26 Nov 2006, 22:57

Decagon wrote:What if Lennox Lewis was white? I bet he'd be ranked as the #1 heavyweight of all time.

I don't know about that.

But I do know that the fact that Lewis is considered British (although he learnt to box in the much more competitive North American environment) has a lot to do with the plaudits he receives.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 26 Nov 2006, 23:10

Decagon wrote:Neither would Marciano, but a bunch of idiots call him the greatest heavyweight of all time.

I think they foolishly look at the 49-0 and transpose it into any era...which is nonsense, of course...I think they think of "undefeated"..more than "white"...atleast, I would hope so...

Heartbreak_Kid79 · Post by **Heartbreak_Kid79** » 27 Nov 2006, 04:59

Decagon wrote:Well, Lewis was champion from what, 1999 to 2003? That wasn't a great era, either.

A much better era than the heavyweight scene at the moment

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 27 Nov 2006, 07:32

In 99% of cases when I see an undefeated record I think the guy hasn't fought anyone that good.

yiddo14 · Post by **yiddo14** » 27 Nov 2006, 07:43

If Lennox had retired undefeated(lets say the rematches against McCall/Rahman had been played out in the first meeting)you would have an argument daily on here with Lennox fans claiming he was the best ever.
With his talent and the fights he had he SHOULD have retired undefeated,but it's something of a blessing he did'nt,because as I said,you would get loads of people claiming he was the greatest ever!

And thats coming from a fully paid up Lennox Lewis fan.

pound per pound · Post by **pound per pound** » 27 Nov 2006, 08:53

Tantum wrote:Barry, You can't fault Lennox because McCall was a crackhead... But I agree it should not count as a legitimate victory.

Props to Lennox for trying to avenge his loss, though.

What are the chances the McCall fight was fixed? It seems that McCall wasn't all that interested in fighting back. He took a few right hands, but because he was known to be a durable fighter, this was not enough to sell the fix. Instead of taking more punishment, McCall began to cry.

sockdolager · Post by **sockdolager** » 27 Nov 2006, 08:57

pound per pound wrote:
Tantum wrote:Barry, You can't fault Lennox because McCall was a crackhead... But I agree it should not count as a legitimate victory.

Props to Lennox for trying to avenge his loss, though.
What are the chances the McCall fight was fixed? It seems that McCall wasn't all that interested in fighting back. He took a few right hands, but because he was known to be a durable fighter, this was not enough to sell the fix. Instead of taking more punishment, McCall began to cry.

anyone have a clip of this? I'd love to see it for some strange reason.

edit~ nevermind, I found it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ9UQpa-Atk

barry · Post by **barry** » 27 Nov 2006, 14:23

>>>Props to Lennox for trying to avenge his loss, though.<<<

That is true Tantum...you can't fault Lewis for McCall's loose screws, but he should get praise for wanting to avenge his losses, even if they were done in much less than stellar fashion he did have the balls to face the "moneky on his back" and went after both guys that knocked him out and avenged the losses...in one case impressively!

barry · Post by **barry** » 27 Nov 2006, 14:31

>>>In 99% of cases when I see an undefeated record I think the guy hasn't fought anyone that good.<<<

That's a big reason why very few pre-1960 fighters every had any long undefeated streaks. They were about fighting the best and when that happens fighters lose sometimes...it's not like today's world of boxing in building up a 25-0 record while going through as easy a resume as one can get by with with the least resistence possible...it's also why the quality of fighters has greatly diminished overall. There is a small handful of real top notch fighters who mostly fight very good opposition, but the problem is that the opposition has taken the easist road possible to get to the best of today and as a result they usually get blown out in a couple of rounds!

monkeybusiness · Post by **monkeybusiness** » 27 Nov 2006, 15:46

I suppose you could argue that of the most recent stellar Hvyweight champs-Lewis, Holy and Tyson-Lewis was the only one to avenge all his losses, though it must be said McCall/Rahman were lesser opponents than Moorer/Lewis/Douglas(?). I suppose you could put Bowe in there as well, who came back to beat Holy in the rubber match. Shows a bit of character, especially after losing by KO

thedon44 · Post by **thedon44** » 27 Nov 2006, 19:27

Diamond WEAPON wrote:Well for Lewis to have retired undefeated he would've had to have done it at age 29 after only having the title for about a year (how long he had it before McCall KO's him) so it's hardly what anyone would call an amazing career. I think being beaten only to come back better than before only helps bolster his standing though, cause virtually every fighter has a loss or two no matter how great, how they come back from them can say quite a bit about them though.

Mraciano retired 49 and 0 undeafeated and one of the greatest ever if not the greatest ..also beat ali in a comoputer fight although it would be a great fight if it happened for real..

Crease · Post by **Crease** » 01 Dec 2006, 13:01

Yeah, marciano is really under-rated in this hollowed domain.

And I can tell ya this much, he's beat better oppostion than Lewis.

Lewis (barely) beat Holyfield + it took as many rounds to kncok out a tired, baffled and old Tyson.

Then he was controversially awarded the fight against Klitchsko.

Lewis' resume is hardly eye-catching.

And Marciano is up there with the best of ALL TIME, not just resume-wise BUT fighting wise.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 01 Dec 2006, 13:18

Crease wrote:Then he was controversially awarded the fight against Klitchsko.

It was hardly controversial.

monkeybusiness · Post by **monkeybusiness** » 01 Dec 2006, 19:44

I dont think Lewis should be criticised for the Klitschko fight. He managed to stop, on cuts, a dangerous fighter and recognising his skills were on the decline, retired on top. Far better retire and not have a rematch just in case than to fight and lose.

Diamond WEAPON · Post by **Diamond WEAPON** » 01 Dec 2006, 19:55

The Great John L wrote:
Crease wrote:Then he was controversially awarded the fight against Klitchsko.
It was hardly controversial.

Seriously, Lewis basically ripped open a large part of Klitschkos face and cuts that deep could be very dangerous to a fighter's permanent vision so it was right that it was stopped.

What if Lewis had retired undefeated?

What if Lewis had retired undefeated?

re

Re: re

Re: What if Lewis had retired undefeated?

McCall

Re: McCall

re

re

Marciano was undeafeated so all didnt have losses