If Lennox never fights again...

Riddick Bowie · Post by **Riddick Bowie** » 05 Nov 2003, 16:12

you people all seem to be forgeting that not only did 'Da Man' mike tyson vacate his wbc title in 1996 to not have to fight lewis, but ALSO paid him 4 MILLION DOLLARS to not press the issue!!

same with bowe. dropped the belt rather than fight lewis.

you people are unforgiving.

PS to those saying earlier versions of holyfied and tyson would beat lewis- think about this: the pair of them have ALWAYS had their hands full with lewis-sized heavies (blood, ribalta, bonecrusher, tucker, ruddock, bowe), and none of those heavies are the in the same league as lewis.

thinkaboutit.

PostMortem · Post by **PostMortem** » 05 Nov 2003, 20:41

Okay, its somehow okay for Lewis to dodge Ruiz because no one wants to see it, but when Tyson or Bowe dodge Lewis for guys like Holyfield it is somehow wrong? Man, Lewis' fights are so fornicating boring - no one wants to see that. Just recently do I want to see his fights so I can see his arrogant prick ass get KOed. But won't happen since Lewis won't fight again.

Costa · Post by **Costa** » 05 Nov 2003, 22:49

Thank you so much postmortem for your informative post. So many dislike Lewis because his fights are "boring" which supposedly discredits his victories . Other people when criticising Lewis should use facts rather then assumptions. Debates concerning Lewis and other British fighters have become increasingly pointless on this forum.

Riddick Bowie · Post by **Riddick Bowie** » 06 Nov 2003, 10:08

PostMortem wrote:Okay, its somehow okay for Lewis to dodge Ruiz because no one wants to see it, but when Tyson or Bowe dodge Lewis for guys like Holyfield it is somehow wrong? Man, Lewis' fights are so fornicating boring - no one wants to see that. Just recently do I want to see his fights so I can see his arrogant prick ass get KOed. But won't happen since Lewis won't fight again.

this post really sums up how ignorant postmortem is and how his writings should be disregarded.

you cant/dont want to see the difference between lewis dumping a belt over a bullshit mandatory no one wants to see, and going for the threat and the legit #1 heavy, and bowe and tyson dumping belts and DUCKING the real threat and the #1 heavy in favour of easy opponents.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 06 Nov 2003, 11:21

PostMortem wrote:Okay, its somehow okay for Lewis to dodge Ruiz because no one wants to see it, but when Tyson or Bowe dodge Lewis for guys like Holyfield it is somehow wrong? Man, Lewis' fights are so fornicating boring - no one wants to see that. Just recently do I want to see his fights so I can see his arrogant prick ass get KOed. But won't happen since Lewis won't fight again.

Yet again your knowledge is shown up to be 'flaky' at best.

Tyson ducked Lewis to fight Holyfield because he expected to beat the living crap out of Holyfield. Leading up to the fight people were talking about Holyfield possibly getting killed (yes really), Tyson and his team thought it was the easy option. Well it probably was because Lewis would have beaten Tyson up even more badly.

That Holyfield caused one of the greatest upsets of modern times is testament to Captain Vander, not Tyson for bravely accepting the challenge.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 06 Nov 2003, 14:46

Goz wrote:
PostMortem wrote:Okay, its somehow okay for Lewis to dodge Ruiz because no one wants to see it, but when Tyson or Bowe dodge Lewis for guys like Holyfield it is somehow wrong? Man, Lewis' fights are so fornicating boring - no one wants to see that. Just recently do I want to see his fights so I can see his arrogant prick ass get KOed. But won't happen since Lewis won't fight again.
Yet again your knowledge is shown up to be 'flaky' at best.

Tyson ducked Lewis to fight Holyfield because he expected to beat the living crap out of Holyfield. Leading up to the fight people were talking about Holyfield possibly getting killed (yes really), Tyson and his team thought it was the easy option. Well it probably was because Lewis would have beaten Tyson up even more badly.

That Holyfield caused one of the greatest upsets of modern times is testament to Captain Vander, not Tyson for bravely accepting the challenge.

Goz, I'm not saying your wrong but there is another way of looking at it namely $$$$$$$$.

Whoose the bigger box office attraction (especially at the time) Holyfield or Lewis? Certainly Evander Holyfield - Lewis hasn't acquired the same box office in fights not involving Tyson or Holyfield as Evander did for his match ups with Douglas, Holmes and Foreman.

So, rather than these boxers being labelled 'wimps' for not taking the Lewis fight isn't it correct that both Bowe and Tyson were getting better money for taking on Evander.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Nov 2003, 05:43

stujones wrote:
Goz wrote:
PostMortem wrote:Okay, its somehow okay for Lewis to dodge Ruiz because no one wants to see it, but when Tyson or Bowe dodge Lewis for guys like Holyfield it is somehow wrong? Man, Lewis' fights are so fornicating boring - no one wants to see that. Just recently do I want to see his fights so I can see his arrogant prick ass get KOed. But won't happen since Lewis won't fight again.
Yet again your knowledge is shown up to be 'flaky' at best.

Tyson ducked Lewis to fight Holyfield because he expected to beat the living crap out of Holyfield. Leading up to the fight people were talking about Holyfield possibly getting killed (yes really), Tyson and his team thought it was the easy option. Well it probably was because Lewis would have beaten Tyson up even more badly.

That Holyfield caused one of the greatest upsets of modern times is testament to Captain Vander, not Tyson for bravely accepting the challenge.
Goz, I'm not saying your wrong but there is another way of looking at it namely $$$$$$$$.

Whoose the bigger box office attraction (especially at the time) Holyfield or Lewis? Certainly Evander Holyfield - Lewis hasn't acquired the same box office in fights not involving Tyson or Holyfield as Evander did for his match ups with Douglas, Holmes and Foreman.

So, rather than these boxers being labelled 'wimps' for not taking the Lewis fight isn't it correct that both Bowe and Tyson were getting better money for taking on Evander.

Better money for less risk, yes. Better to beat up the all-American hero and shift a billion PPV's than lose to that scary big rastafarian from the UK.

And besides this is exactly what that previous poster was slating lewis for, taking $$$$ to fight Michael Grant instead of taking on the fearsome John Ruiz.

It's just plain hypocracy, Lewis simply cannot win. I say he was avodided, people say 'oh well those guys took the big money fights instead of meeting Lewis' and then in their next breath slate Lewis for doing the same thing!!!!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Nov 2003, 06:51

Goz wrote:
Better money for less risk, yes. Better to beat up the all-American hero and shift a billion PPV's than lose to that scary big rastafarian from the UK.

And besides this is exactly what that previous poster was slating lewis for, taking $$$$ to fight Michael Grant instead of taking on the fearsome John Ruiz.

It's just plain hypocracy, Lewis simply cannot win. I say he was avodided, people say 'oh well those guys took the big money fights instead of meeting Lewis' and then in their next breath slate Lewis for doing the same thing!!!!

Yeah, fair points and if I was Lewis I would have done the same thing. Victory of Grant (at that time) enhanced his legacy than a victory over Ruiz. I haven't criticised Lewis.

What my main point is that Holyfield was far from a BUM, its hard for me to say Lewis was ever "da man" when Bowe and Tyson elected to miss/duck/not bargin with Lewis and faught Holyfield. Had it have been a poorer fighter (such as a Tommy Morrison) then I could agree. However to say "beat up the all American hero" is a bit harsh, I'm sure neither Bowe or Tyson thought it was going to be easy - 2003 was the first time someones beaten Holyfield easy.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 07 Nov 2003, 07:12

Holyfield was clearly not finished in 1996, but everyone thought he was pre Nov 9th BIG TIME. Against Bowe a year earlier Evander was gasping after only 3 rounds. Nobody believed that he'd been ill in the week leading up to that fight, it just looked clear that the Real Deal was washed up after so many hard battles. But of course to everyones amazement he proved otherwise against the fastest, most dangerous fighter on the planet.

But while Lewis was avoided in 96 by Team Tyson I still think the fight would've happened in 97 had everything gone to plan (Moorer was to be next after Holyfield). It HAD to happen. And nobody will ever convince me that Lewis could've dealt with the pressure of Tyson back then. I doubt the best shots of Lewis (the few that he would've connected with) would have cause Mike all that much concern. Lennox would have been badly roughed up by the one guy he could not contain.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Nov 2003, 08:53

stujones wrote:
Goz wrote:
Better money for less risk, yes. Better to beat up the all-American hero and shift a billion PPV's than lose to that scary big rastafarian from the UK.

And besides this is exactly what that previous poster was slating lewis for, taking $$$$ to fight Michael Grant instead of taking on the fearsome John Ruiz.

It's just plain hypocracy, Lewis simply cannot win. I say he was avodided, people say 'oh well those guys took the big money fights instead of meeting Lewis' and then in their next breath slate Lewis for doing the same thing!!!!
Yeah, fair points and if I was Lewis I would have done the same thing. Victory of Grant (at that time) enhanced his legacy than a victory over Ruiz. I haven't criticised Lewis.

What my main point is that Holyfield was far from a BUM, its hard for me to say Lewis was ever "da man" when Bowe and Tyson elected to miss/duck/not bargin with Lewis and faught Holyfield. Had it have been a poorer fighter (such as a Tommy Morrison) then I could agree. However to say "beat up the all American hero" is a bit harsh, I'm sure neither Bowe or Tyson thought it was going to be easy - 2003 was the first time someones beaten Holyfield easy.

Stu - This is what I mean about short memories. At the time (1996) people thought Holyfield was totally finished, I have the US version on tape and in the previews they were actually fearing for Holyfield's life!

Quite patently Evander was not finished but that wasn't my point, Tyson & co thought Holyfield was by far the easier option than taking on Lennox Lewis.

Bowe is different, I never said he ducked Lewis to specifically face Holyfield, he spent plenty of time as champion ducking Lewis and fighting the likes of Micheal Dokes.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Nov 2003, 09:07

Goz where they fearing for Holyfields life because of he was shot, or was it because everyone thought Tyson was back (to his very best). I would say a little of both.

The previous Holyfield performances vs Mercer and even Bowe showed that while it easier to see he was not the fighter he was, he was still a good fighter.

Tyson vs Holyfield (the build up) reminded me of Ali vs Foreman.

As for Bowe, your correct. However, after a 12 round war with Holyfield in November its hard not to blame Bowe for not taking on Lewis in January which is what the WBC demanded.

I'm sure Holyfield would have done the same thing.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Nov 2003, 09:26

One more thing on this issue. There seems to be an element of blame on Tysons part (by some of the posters) for being stripped of the WBC title in 1996.

However, equally to blame in this instance was Bruno. Lewis was the number 1 contendor before Bruno actually won the belt.

I remember the cover sheet on boxing monthly the month he won the title. With a picture of Bruno and Lewis entitled "Do the right thing, Frank". It seems all very well to slag off Tyson for taking the $$$ option, but not Bruno.

If Tyson would have been forced to have faced Lewis way before his fight with Seldon (remember he wasn't stripped for an $$$ money fight with Holyfield, but for a electing to unifying the titles with Seldon). It was Bruno who should have faught Lewis in 1996 not Tyson.

Riddick Bowie · Post by **Riddick Bowie** » 07 Nov 2003, 09:40

people, people, people

those of you defending tyson, saying he was going after a big money fight v holyfield (that cost him $4 million and the wbc title before round 1 even started), should bare in mind that AFTER his anticpated 1 rd blowout of 'shot' holyfield, they were lining up a fight with either frans botha or michael moorer as next opponent.

are they bigger box office fights than lewis? they are NOT.

tyson and DK had no interest in fighting lewsi, just like bowe before them.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Nov 2003, 09:47

Neil (The Bounty) Hunter wrote:people, people, people

those of you defending tyson, saying he was going after a big money fight v holyfield (that cost him $4 million and the wbc title before round 1 even started), should bare in mind that AFTER his anticpated 1 rd blowout of 'shot' holyfield, they were lining up a fight with either frans botha or michael moorer as next opponent.

are they bigger box office fights than lewis? they are NOT.

tyson and DK had no interest in fighting lewsi, just like bowe before them.

Perhaps their aren't bigger money fights - but there were for the IBF belt. Remember Moorer and Botha contested for the belt on that same night. Thats why it they didn't mention one or the other. Tyson wanted the three belts - that what he kept saying in his interview.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Nov 2003, 09:50

stujones wrote:Goz where they fearing for Holyfields life because of he was shot, or was it because everyone thought Tyson was back (to his very best). I would say a little of both.

The previous Holyfield performances vs Mercer and even Bowe showed that while it easier to see he was not the fighter he was, he was still a good fighter.

Tyson vs Holyfield (the build up) reminded me of Ali vs Foreman.

As for Bowe, your correct. However, after a 12 round war with Holyfield in November its hard not to blame Bowe for not taking on Lewis in January which is what the WBC demanded.

I'm sure Holyfield would have done the same thing.

Ok, as long as we're agreed Tyson took on Holyfield because it was the easier option! That was all I was debating, shot or not, Tyson back to his best, whatever, Team Tyson felt it was an easy $1000000 billion for knocking out Holyfield or £20 for risking defeat against Lennox Lewis.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Nov 2003, 10:01

We've both (Goz and myself) got it way wrong. Just read the Mike Tyson profile on boxrec. Tyson got stripped for electing to fight Bruce Seldon for the WBA belt. Now he was certainly an easier option, but we know Tyson ambition (after his first incarceration) was to capture the belts 1,2,3 like he did in 1986-1987. However, he couldn't do it cause the WBC stripped him but it didn't bother him because he still considered himself champion (remember his speech after the Seldon victory - "Cus, 2 down 1 to go" - even though he lost one).

Now, you might ask, why didn't he fight for the IBF title in Novemeber. Well he couldn't because the IBF had ordered Moorer to face Botha or be stripped. This was due to Botha winning the vacant belt against Schultz, but being stripped after failing a drugs test. Hence, as Neil said DK and Tyson were already in talks with the Botha vs Moorer winner.

Tyson being stripped had nothing to do with the Holyfield fight in November.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Nov 2003, 10:01

Kilburn wrote:I doubt the best shots of Lewis (the few that he would've connected with) would have cause Mike all that much concern. Lennox would have been badly roughed up by the one guy he could not contain.

By the way I pick Lewis to beat Tyson (I would wouldn't I?!!) at any time apart from the 86-89 vintage and even that is not beyond the realms of possiblity.

Two very simple for reasons for this.

1 - Mike Tyson has never, I repeat never, won a hard fight. Well maybe the Ruddock fights were quite tough but never has he come from behind or from serious adversity to win a fight. You gain the upper hand and he falls apart then gets knocked out. If Lewis was still there after a round or two and I think he would have been because he would made sure his defence was inpenetrable, he slaps Tyson with a few jabs and beats him up for another 5/6 rounds depending on how hard Tyson has trained.

2 - The manner of Lewis's victory over Tyson was SO comprehensive last year that regardless of Tyson's deterioration you almost have to make a Lewis even a sight favourite at any stage in their career. Tyson showed against Etienne that he's still quite similar to what he has alsways been, go in there, bang them out in a round or two and pick up your big fat cheque. If they are still standing after 5 rounds then start crossing your fingers for him. Even the Nielsen fight showed this, Tyson had him down early and battered him for the rounds that ensued, but even the big fat Dane was coming back into that fight when it was stopped. A fitter fighter might well have caused Tyson a lot more problems.

Riddick Bowie · Post by **Riddick Bowie** » 07 Nov 2003, 10:52

stujones wrote: Perhaps their aren't bigger money fights - but there were for the IBF belt. Remember Moorer and Botha contested for the belt on that same night. Thats why it they didn't mention one or the other. Tyson wanted the three belts - that what he kept saying in his interview.

THEN WHY DID HE DUMP THE WBC BELT AND PAY LEWIS OFF IF HE WANTED THEM SO BAD??????????????????????????????????????????

Riddick Bowie · Post by **Riddick Bowie** » 07 Nov 2003, 10:56

get it right stu, tyson WAS NOT stripped. he still held the wbc title when he fought seldon, however only the wba belt was on the line.

if it says otherwise on boxrec then they are very very WRONG.

he subsequently paid lewis four million dollars and dumped the wbc belt in favour of easy fights v shot holyfield and botha.

SOME UNIFICATION!!!!!!!!!!!

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 07 Nov 2003, 11:03

Goz wrote:By the way I pick Lewis to beat Tyson (I would wouldn't I?!!) at any time apart from the 86-89 vintage and even that is not beyond the realms of possiblity.

Two very simple for reasons for this.

1 - Mike Tyson has never, I repeat never, won a hard fight. Well maybe the Ruddock fights were quite tough but never has he come from behind or from serious adversity to win a fight. You gain the upper hand and he falls apart then gets knocked out. If Lewis was still there after a round or two and I think he would have been because he would made sure his defence was inpenetrable, he slaps Tyson with a few jabs and beats him up for another 5/6 rounds depending on how hard Tyson has trained.

2 - The manner of Lewis's victory over Tyson was SO comprehensive last year that regardless of Tyson's deterioration you almost have to make a Lewis even a sight favourite at any stage in their career. Tyson showed against Etienne that he's still quite similar to what he has alsways been, go in there, bang them out in a round or two and pick up your big fat cheque. If they are still standing after 5 rounds then start crossing your fingers for him. Even the Nielsen fight showed this, Tyson had him down early and battered him for the rounds that ensued, but even the big fat Dane was coming back into that fight when it was stopped. A fitter fighter might well have caused Tyson a lot more problems.

Whatever it is you see Goz I just don't and never will. Honestly for me the "fight" last year between Lewis and Tyson means virtually nothing. I doubt Tyson would've even made it on to Superstars in that kind of shape. The 96 version of Tyson would not have got tired before Lewis, no way at all.

Sometimes I get the impression that because Lewis was avoided by Tyson (though after the Mercer scare it's hard to imagine Mike himself seeing much to genuinely worry him) we should all be crediting Lewis as though he actually beat the guy. In my opinion Lennox would have been more than happy not to face by far the most dangerous heavyweight in the world who did not take a step back. Ray Mercer was more than enough thanks.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 07 Nov 2003, 12:03

From Boxrec.

1996-09-07 219 Bruce Seldon 229 33-3-0
MGM Grand, Las Vegas, NV, USA W TKO 1
WBA Heavyweight Title
Referee: Richard Steele
Tyson stripped by WBC immediately after this fight for not fighting mandatory challenger Lennox Lewis. WBC title not on the line.

I think this is the most accurate perception, peoples memories fade. Tyson was stripped the moment he stepped into the against Seldon. Why was the WBC not on the line - was Seldon not worthy.

Also Neil, I like how you keep mentioning it as Tyson vs Botha, when you and I both know it was to be Tyson vs the IBF champion.

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 07 Nov 2003, 13:25

Good thread guys, been having debates over Lewis for many years now. Debating with people like Stu and Kilburn is absolutely dandy in my book and a big thumbs up to you guys. You will notice that as the thread became more 'in depth' the posters like Nasty vanished?

Those are the fools I have a problem with, not people who people who state their case as eloquently as you guys.

Just so long as you all understand I was right

Have a good weekend.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 07 Nov 2003, 13:31

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 08 Nov 2003, 11:10

Goz wrote:Good thread guys, been having debates over Lewis for many years now. Debating with people like Stu and Kilburn is absolutely dandy in my book and a big thumbs up to you guys. You will notice that as the thread became more 'in depth' the posters like Nasty vanished?

Those are the fools I have a problem with, not people who people who state their case as eloquently as you guys.

Just so long as you all understand I was right

Have a good weekend.

Thanks, I'll take that you admit defeat lol!

No, its been fun.

nasty · Post by **nasty** » 08 Nov 2003, 11:17

fornicate you!

The reason I stopped posting was you guys had your head buried so far up Lewis's arse, you've become used to posting shit!

Lewis is a good boxer but just got lucky, that's all!

Great fighters don't get ko'd twice from, in your words, lucky punches!

Plus the guy aint British! Ever noticed the fact he won a Gold medal for Canada and always goes on Canadian TV saying how proud he is to be Canadian!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HELP SAVE AMERICA FROM G.W.BUSH
VOTE SEN. JOHN KERRY FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004
http://www.johnKerry.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------