BoxRec

I also am not clear on why Holyfield would be favored to beat Lennox Lewis considering that he lost to Michael Moorer in his prime. Lennox Lewis clearly seems more formidable than Moorer yet Moorer beat a Holyfield 5 years younger than the one that fought Lewis.

First off, Moorer-Holyfield really coulda gone either way. It was a very close fight. 2ndly, Holyfield had some sort of health problem the night of the fight, as confirmed by doctors. It was prob. a byproduct of Evander's steroid abuse. 3rdly, Moorer and Lewis are nothing alike-Moorer was a slick, fast southpaw.

Just watch Holyfield-Lewis 11, and then watch ANY Evander fight from 1988-1993 and tell me a prime Holyfield would not have knocked Lennox OUT!

evander abused steroids?

Yeah, he's overrated but he sure looks good compared to the crap that's fighting in that division now.

Why is Lewis overrated? Can't see how anyone that applies some common sense and logic can come to this conclusion. Beat every fighter that was out there (and willing to face him hello Riddick Bowe hello) and ruled for a decade. So what's the problem?

bollox wrote:So what's the problem?

I don't have any problem with Lennox Lewis at all but I have always felt that some people do because he was not usually an aggressive fighter and because he was 'British'.

KOJOE90 wrote:

bollox wrote:So what's the problem?

I don't have any problem with Lennox Lewis at all but I have always felt that some people do because he was not usually an aggressive fighter and because he was 'British'.

True. Lewis winning the HW title put HW boxing on it's ear fora while and a lot of noses out of joint. The "horizontal British HW' bubble was burst

There were some good European heavyweights around before Lennox Lewis. Joe Bugner was not technically British but he seems to have had a good chin since he was only knocked out once in his prime.

sharkeysboy wrote:Yeah, he's overrated but he sure looks good compared to the crap that's fighting in that division now.

AMEN to that, i think thats part of the reason lennox and evander are considered so great.

I think Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe and Tyson were a good era for boxing. Theyw eren't quite up to the 1970s top guys but they were all solid performers who could be competitive against anyone. I certainly think that generation were better than the mainstay of the 1980s guys.

I think lewis and Holyfield achieved greatness whilst Bowe and Tyson threw their chance away (or maybe weren't quite good enough).

I'm not sure who comes out on top Lewis or Holyfield both have their own supporters but overall it was a good era for HWs.

Ezzard wrote:I think Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe and Tyson were a good era for boxing. Theyw eren't quite up to the 1970s top guys but they were all solid performers who could be competitive against anyone. I certainly think that generation were better than the mainstay of the 1980s guys.

I think lewis and Holyfield achieved greatness whilst Bowe and Tyson threw their chance away (or maybe weren't quite good enough).

I'm not sure who comes out on top Lewis or Holyfield both have their own supporters but overall it was a good era for HWs.

This was probably the longest stretched era.

Tyson fought Holyfield when he was past his prime, Holyfield fought Lewis while he was past his prime.

What would have happened if they all fought in their prime?

KOJOE90 wrote:

bollox wrote:So what's the problem?

I don't have any problem with Lennox Lewis at all but I have always felt that some people do because he was not usually an aggressive fighter and because he was 'British'.

Yeah, that's the only logical explanation. Americans underrate Lewis because he's British. It couldn't possibly be that the British overrate Lewis because he's the only heavyweight they could get excited about since Bob Fitzsimmons (who the Aussies claim as theirs).

"Oh, that we could see ourselves as others see us." Rabbie Burns.

sharkeysboy wrote:Yeah, that's the only logical explanation. Americans underrate Lewis because he's British. It couldn't possibly be that the British overrate Lewis because he's the only heavyweight they could get excited about since Bob Fitzsimmons (who the Aussies claim as theirs).

Excellent point. However, since there are so many Americans who claim that Riddick Bowe could have beaten LL in the pros, there is probably a great deal of validity to the claims of the Brits that we are underrating LL because he is British.

Now let's see, didn't LL actually represent Canada in the Olympics?

Grimm wrote:

Ezzard wrote:I think Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe and Tyson were a good era for boxing. Theyw eren't quite up to the 1970s top guys but they were all solid performers who could be competitive against anyone. I certainly think that generation were better than the mainstay of the 1980s guys.

I think lewis and Holyfield achieved greatness whilst Bowe and Tyson threw their chance away (or maybe weren't quite good enough).

I'm not sure who comes out on top Lewis or Holyfield both have their own supporters but overall it was a good era for HWs.

This was probably the longest stretched era.

Tyson fought Holyfield when he was past his prime, Holyfield fought Lewis while he was past his prime.

What would have happened if they all fought in their prime?

I'm not going to get drawn into the 'Tyson's prime' debate as that has been done to death on other threads. I'd say looking at the fights between them all that Holyfield maybe just edges it. I think he was past his prime by the time he fought Lewis and Tyson. Taking that into consideration I'd vote for him.

Lewis suffers because like Charles (at heavy) and Holmes he was cautious and did not take too many risks. He wasn't involved in many wars and used his physical advantages and skill to slowly dismantle opponents or keep them off him so that he could win decisions. Many fans want a bit more from their champion because of the romance which surrounds the greatest prize in sport. But Lewis beat everyone except for Bowe and it wasn't his fault that they never met.

Ezzard wrote:

Grimm wrote:

Ezzard wrote:I think Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe and Tyson were a good era for boxing. Theyw eren't quite up to the 1970s top guys but they were all solid performers who could be competitive against anyone. I certainly think that generation were better than the mainstay of the 1980s guys.

I think lewis and Holyfield achieved greatness whilst Bowe and Tyson threw their chance away (or maybe weren't quite good enough).

I'm not sure who comes out on top Lewis or Holyfield both have their own supporters but overall it was a good era for HWs.

This was probably the longest stretched era.

Tyson fought Holyfield when he was past his prime, Holyfield fought Lewis while he was past his prime.

What would have happened if they all fought in their prime?

I'm not going to get drawn into the 'Tyson's prime' debate as that has been done to death on other threads. I'd say looking at the fights between them all that Holyfield maybe just edges it. I think he was past his prime by the time he fought Lewis and Tyson. Taking that into consideration I'd vote for him.

Lewis suffers because like Charles (at heavy) and Holmes he was cautious and did not take too many risks. He wasn't involved in many wars and used his physical advantages and skill to slowly dismantle opponents or keep them off him so that he could win decisions. Many fans want a bit more from their champion because of the romance which surrounds the greatest prize in sport. But Lewis beat everyone except for Bowe and it wasn't his fault that they never met.

It's kinda sad that this devision never gave any good answers of who was really the champion of the nineties. All the best one's fought past there or there oponent primes. Besides Holy and Bowe ofcourse

Even in his prime Holyfield was terrible against movers. If you stood in front of Holyfield you lost, if you moved you had a good shot at beating him. if lennox would have stood toe to toe with him he gets knocked out. he used his size and mobility and won. Look how pesky chubby, way past his prime Bobby Czyz was with just a little movement.