KOTV last night: Lennox- Lewis vs. Weaver

[Tuan_Jim]

Lewis also turned down a lucrative big money fight on HBO with Riddick Bowe in 1996. This was after Bowe KOd Holyfield and was regarded by the media as the number one heavyweight in the world. Lewis instead opted to fight 36 year old Ray Mercer, who he was expected to KO, for far less money. I remember Boxing Monthly were utterly baffled by his behaviour.

The Brits who endlessly waffle about everyone ducking Lewis seem to be ignorant of all this. While I love Lewis, he had Bowe set up for 95 but was KOd by McCall, he was offered Tyson and Bowe in 96 when he was no draw, and he was never in a rush to meet Tua.

He's nowhere near the hard-done-by heavyweight so many imagine him to be.

[SNG]

Exactly the point, they wanted a piece after he was stopped and he was no draw. Bowe wanted nothing to do with him before Lewis looked vulnerable. As for fighting Tyson in 96, look at Lewis' actual purse when he did, he made the right choice I think.

[thepocketrocket]

Exactly the point, they wanted a piece after he was stopped and he was no draw. Bowe wanted nothing to do with him before Lewis looked vulnerable. As for fighting Tyson in 96, look at Lewis' actual purse when he did, he made the right choice I think.

Depends on what you mean 'the right choice'. Financially he did make the right choice. No doubt.

Still, when people look back on Lewis and his fight with Tyson, he will get about as much credit (other than from the Lewis ultras) as Marciano did for beating Louis, and Calzaghe for beating Jones. He will be seen as beating the name, not the fighter.

So pick which you think is the win. Really subjective

[Tuan_Jim]

Exactly the point, they wanted a piece after he was stopped and he was no draw. Bowe wanted nothing to do with him before Lewis looked vulnerable. As for fighting Tyson in 96, look at Lewis' actual purse when he did, he made the right choice I think.

You've misunderstood the point and invented you're own.

The Lewis/Bowe fight was a go on TVKO for 95. Lewis screwed it up when he got KOd by McCall.

The next time it could happen was after Bowe KOd Holyfield and Lewis KOd Morrison in what most thought was his most complete performance to date. Lewis declined to fight Bowe for big bucks and had a night of hell with a 36 year old Ray Mercer for chump change.

[mike john]

It may not have been Lewis' fault, but he fought the good names when they were shot. Saying that proved he was the best of his generation is like saying Calzaghe proved himself better than Hopkins and Jones with his legend killing tour.

Then again, everyone reaches their peak at the same time, so a lot will be conjecture. He may well have beaten them, we will never know.

Either way, the great names of the division wouldn't ever get banged out by Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman. The fact he came back and beat them is more of a sad indication that he shouldn't have lost to them in the first place.

A really good heavyweight, but not at the top table I don't think

holyfield was past his best, he wasnt shot.

you state lewis' record suffers because the big names he faced were past their best.
you then bring up lewis' loss to mccall as further damning evidence, yet lewis had not even reached his best at that point

He was a big enough name and a world champion...this wasn't a novice mistake.

My point is that the truly great names would not have been knocked out by McCall or Rahman. That;s what make him top ten and not top 3-5

what do being a big name and world champion have to do with it? its a fact that lennox became a much better fighter after losing to mccall. imo lewis didnt reach his prime until 3 years after losing to oliver.

you cant have it both ways. if you want to detract from lennox's win over evander, thats fair enough, no-one would claim holyfield was at the peak of his powers, but i dont see how you can then say lewis losing to oliver mccall is some career defining event when lennox himself was far from the fighter he would become

[thepocketrocket]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lost to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

[bigjack]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lopst to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't ask act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

Out of interest,what is your top ten ?,is larry holmes in it ?

[mike john]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lopst to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't ask act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

i dont hold it against fighters who lose past their prime, so i dont hold it against fighters who lose before they reach their prime. this logic seems simple to grasp in my eyes, yet it makes me some kind of sycophant to you?

my point of contention with you isnt where you do or do not rate lewis, its that i do not see how you can knock lennox for beating a fighter past their prime, and then knock him again for being beaten himself before he reached his prime. does being in your prime matter or not?

[thepocketrocket]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lopst to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't ask act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

Out of interest,what is your top ten ?,is larry holmes in it ?

Oh Larry is definitely in it...in top five and all...hugely underrated because he wasn't media friendly

[thepocketrocket]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lopst to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't ask act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

i dont hold it against fighters who lose past their prime, so i dont hold it against fighters who lose before they reach their prime. this logic seems simple to grasp in my eyes, yet it makes me some kind of sycophant to you?

my point of contention with you isnt where you do or do not rate lewis, its that i do not see how you can knock lennox for beating a fighter past their prime, and then knock him again for being beaten himself before he reached his prime. does being in your prime matter or not?

I know the point you are making. I just see a huge distinction between debating the merits of a victory in relation to where the opponent was and how much stock you put in it, and someone getting iced by a fringe contender, twice.

[thepocketrocket]

We are in danger of Lewis's defeat against McCall being painted as some sort of rookie error from a three fight novice. The man was a world champion, yet I am being asked to ignore it because he hadn't reached his peak.

He was a good world champion at the time, so the defeat is much more damaging than say Louis getting done by the Rock.

Anyway...all about opinions

[mike john]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lopst to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't ask act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

i dont hold it against fighters who lose past their prime, so i dont hold it against fighters who lose before they reach their prime. this logic seems simple to grasp in my eyes, yet it makes me some kind of sycophant to you?

my point of contention with you isnt where you do or do not rate lewis, its that i do not see how you can knock lennox for beating a fighter past their prime, and then knock him again for being beaten himself before he reached his prime. does being in your prime matter or not?

I know the point you are making. I just see a huge distinction between debating the merits of a victory in relation to where the opponent was and how much stock you put in it, and someone getting iced by a fringe contender, twice.

but you're taking credit away from lewis' win over evander for this very reason?

out of interest then, how do you see ali's loss to leon spinks effecting his legacy? ali being past his best but having beaten earnie shavers less than 6 months previously? also evander holyfield himself, running lewis close over 12 then losing to john ruiz just over a year later? i would argue both were better fighters at these points in their respective careers than lewis was in '94. i dont see these as big black marks on their records, presumably you do

[thepocketrocket]

Now here is where we diverge. The fact that Ruiz was able to beat Holy is probably a sad indictment of where Holy was at that stage of his career. The fact that Lewis was run so close (arguably lost) probably shouldn't be looked at too closely by Lewis fans

Lewis on the other hand had beaten Ruddock and Bruno running up to the match with McCall. I would argue he was a damn site better than Holy was at the time of the Lewis/Ruiz matches.

As for Ali...I have never seen both fights all the way through so kind of difficult to comment. I do know the Ali industry makes it tantamount to devil worship to ever question anything Ali ever did. Mohammed certainly got nice scorecards throughout his career, but that never gets looked at. But I can certainly see a symmetry between Ali losing to Spinks, and then coming back and winning the title and Lewis beating Rahman. The Ali-holics think that is a truly wonderful achievement. I would question what he was doing losing to Spinks in the first place.

[bigjack]

Lennox was a world champion at the time of both KO defeats to guys who wouldn't have been in with a chance against a top five all time heavyweight.

I look at it in the way of would the likes of Louis, Ali, Frazier and alike ever have been beaten by average guys like Rahman and McCall? No excuses about coming to the peak...they wouldn't have lopst to them. Yes Lennox improved (still got banged out by Rahman later on) but it takes a special kind of Lewis fan to think they don't ask act as big black marks on the record.

I have him as a top ten, but coupled with the fact he never beat a great heavy at their peak, they knock him down a bit

Out of interest,what is your top ten ?,is larry holmes in it ?

Oh Larry is definitely in it...in top five and all...hugely underrated because he wasn't media friendly

Holmes never beat a great fighter at their peak though just like Lewis

[thepocketrocket]

Yes, but he beat Norton a few months after he got fleeced by Ali, Shavers a few months after he iced Norton in one, and Witherspoon and Weaver BEFORE they went on to become world champions.

That mullers up Lewis' wins against Mavrovic, Grant and Tua in my opinion

[bigjack]

Yes, but he beat Norton a few months after he got fleeced by Ali, Shavers a few months after he iced Norton in one, and Witherspoon and Weaver BEFORE they went on to become world champions.

That mullers up Lewis' wins against Mavrovic, Grant and Tua in my opinion

Actually it was closer to 2 years after he lost to Ali when Larry beat him by one round,and you can't bring Witherspoon and Weaver into it,they were only fragmented title holders,never even cosidored anything special.Lewis beat Bruno before he went on to become world champ,nothing special in that is there

[thepocketrocket]

Yes, but he beat Norton a few months after he got fleeced by Ali, Shavers a few months after he iced Norton in one, and Witherspoon and Weaver BEFORE they went on to become world champions.

That mullers up Lewis' wins against Mavrovic, Grant and Tua in my opinion

Actually it was closer to 2 years after he lost to Ali when Larry beat him by one round,and you can't bring Witherspoon and Weaver into it,they were only fragmented title holders,never even cosidored anything special.Lewis beat Bruno before he went on to become world champ,nothing special in that is there

Let us get something straight...even in the period that we have awful champions and fragmented titles around Lewis', the guys who Lewis beat never went on to do anything...sad indictment of their quality.

Holmes beat better guys and guess what? He never got knocked out by fringe contenders.

I sense an element of butthurt with the Lewis fan club here. I am not the anti-Lewis candidate. I realise he had brilliant skills. He is a top ten heavy in my opinion, which is good going. I just don't think beating holy who was well, well on the slide, Tyson who was a corpse and getting banged out by C level fighters like McCall and Rahman makes you top five heavy.

I don't consider that view controversial

[mike john]

Now here is where we diverge. The fact that Ruiz was able to beat Holy is probably a sad indictment of where Holy was at that stage of his career. The fact that Lewis was run so close (arguably lost) probably shouldn't be looked at too closely by Lewis fans

Lewis on the other hand had beaten Ruddock and Bruno running up to the match with McCall. I would argue he was a damn site better than Holy was at the time of the Lewis/Ruiz matches.

As for Ali...I have never seen both fights all the way through so kind of difficult to comment. I do know the Ali industry makes it tantamount to devil worship to ever question anything Ali ever did. Mohammed certainly got nice scorecards throughout his career, but that never gets looked at. But I can certainly see a symmetry between Ali losing to Spinks, and then coming back and winning the title and Lewis beating Rahman. The Ali-holics think that is a truly wonderful achievement. I would question what he was doing losing to Spinks in the first place.

cant let you have that my friend. there is no way the lewis who beat razor was a damn site better than the holyfield who went in with lewis and ruiz

[bigjack]

Yes, but he beat Norton a few months after he got fleeced by Ali, Shavers a few months after he iced Norton in one, and Witherspoon and Weaver BEFORE they went on to become world champions.

That mullers up Lewis' wins against Mavrovic, Grant and Tua in my opinion

Actually it was closer to 2 years after he lost to Ali when Larry beat him by one round,and you can't bring Witherspoon and Weaver into it,they were only fragmented title holders,never even cosidored anything special.Lewis beat Bruno before he went on to become world champ,nothing special in that is there

Let us get something straight...even in the period that we have awful champions and fragmented titles around Lewis', the guys who Lewis beat never went on to do anything...sad indictment of their quality.

Holmes beat better guys and guess what? He never got knocked out by fringe contenders.



I sense an element of butthurt with the Lewis fan club here. I am not the anti-Lewis candidate. I realise he had brilliant skills. He is a top ten heavy in my opinion, which is good going. I just don't think beating holy who was well, well on the slide, Tyson who was a corpse and getting banged out by C level fighters like McCall and Rahman makes you top five heavy.

I don't consider that view controversial

Nothing controversial at all,just your argument has flaws,you mention Witherspoon as an example of someone who went onto be a champ to back up the case for Holmes,the very same Witherspoon who got 'iced in one' by the great bonecrusher smith years later when Tim he had improved.

[thepocketrocket]

Now here is where we diverge. The fact that Ruiz was able to beat Holy is probably a sad indictment of where Holy was at that stage of his career. The fact that Lewis was run so close (arguably lost) probably shouldn't be looked at too closely by Lewis fans

Lewis on the other hand had beaten Ruddock and Bruno running up to the match with McCall. I would argue he was a damn site better than Holy was at the time of the Lewis/Ruiz matches.

As for Ali...I have never seen both fights all the way through so kind of difficult to comment. I do know the Ali industry makes it tantamount to devil worship to ever question anything Ali ever did. Mohammed certainly got nice scorecards throughout his career, but that never gets looked at. But I can certainly see a symmetry between Ali losing to Spinks, and then coming back and winning the title and Lewis beating Rahman. The Ali-holics think that is a truly wonderful achievement. I would question what he was doing losing to Spinks in the first place.

cant let you have that my friend. there is no way the lewis who beat razor was a damn site better than the holyfield who went in with lewis and ruiz

[thepocketrocket]

Well Witherspoon beat Tubbs, was far more dominant than Lewis prior to the stoppage against Bruno, and took every round almost off Smith in the first fight. I think judging any of the lost generation on one performance is rather daft.

He was then frozen out by King

If anyone thinks a clean Witherspoon wouldn't have beaten the likes of Botha, Rahman, McCall, Grant and Tua then they have my respect, but i can't argue that point as it is so wide of the mark it is unreal

[bigjack]

Well Witherspoon beat Tubbs, was far more dominant than Lewis prior to the stoppage against Bruno, and took every round almost off Smith in the first fight. I think judging any of the lost generation on one performance is rather daft.

He was then frozen out by King

If anyone thinks a clean Witherspoon wouldn't have beaten the likes of Botha, Rahman, McCall, Grant and Tua then they have my respect, but i can't argue that point as it is so wide of the mark it is unreal

Tubbs maybe Bruno improved by the time he fought Lewis.

Lets call it quits then pal and agree to disagree

[thepocketrocket]

Well Witherspoon beat Tubbs, was far more dominant than Lewis prior to the stoppage against Bruno, and took every round almost off Smith in the first fight. I think judging any of the lost generation on one performance is rather daft.

He was then frozen out by King

If anyone thinks a clean Witherspoon wouldn't have beaten the likes of Botha, Rahman, McCall, Grant and Tua then they have my respect, but i can't argue that point as it is so wide of the mark it is unreal

Tubbs maybe Bruno improved by the time he fought Lewis.

Lets call it quits then pal and agree to disagree

Not sure what the laugh over Tubbs was? You do realise that loads of people actually think he beat Bowe in 1991? Really talented fighter..just a fat druggie

But happy to leave this now

[thepocketrocket]

Lewis was better later in his career than he was earlier. Less exciting, maybe, but any fool can see that he was technically much better later on. Or you can read his own views on the flaws that were corrected. By the first McCall fight, he was regressing as a fighter. Again, you don't need to do the BoxRec shuffle to see that, it's all there for the eye to see.

Lewis beats Tyson more often than not IMO. I also posted on here a while ago RE the Bowe situation in the mid-1990s and there's information out there for anyone who wants to find it explaining why it didn't get made.

RazoKOs been making the same points over and over. There's not much depth to them.

As for Witherspoon, it is hard to pick him over mid-level fighters as he came uip short more often than Lewis did and came in out of shape far more often. He was too unpredictable to judge with any accuracy.

On the Witherspoon point, I did make the point that if he was clean he would beat mid level fighters. But yiou are right you could never judge him, or any of the lost generation for that matter

[DavidPayne]

Holyfield is one of the greatest ever at any weight. The fact Lewis beat him comfortably both times in Holyfield's home country counts in his favour, not against him.

A focused 97-01 Lewis doesn't get beat by any HW in history.

Holmes would have beaten him.