BoxRec

I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:19 I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

You can't possibly use Klitchko here. An injury win when he was well ahead of Byrd up to that point. Tsk tsk tsk, not a good one.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:19 I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

OMG, taking Byrd's win over Vitali as a some achievement is hilarious.

DrDuke wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:26

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:19 I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

OMG, taking Byrd's win over Vitali as a some achievement is hilarious.

Vitali was practically pitching a shutout before the injury!

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:28

DrDuke wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:26

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:19 I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

OMG, taking Byrd's win over Vitali as a some achievement is hilarious.

Vitali was practically pitching a shutout before the injury!

Tell it to Alp. However, his Klitschko hate won't allow him to accept it anyway.

DrDuke wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:30

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:28

DrDuke wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:26

OMG, taking Byrd's win over Vitali as a some achievement is hilarious.

Vitali was practically pitching a shutout before the injury!

Tell it to Alp. However, his Klitschko hate won't allow him to accept it anyway.

I did, that post was backing you up broski!

The vast majority of people today rate Lewis ahead of Frazier and Foreman. Your opinion is in the minority. Frazier is often not even in the top 10 these days whereas Lewis seems to be a general consensus top 5.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:50 The vast majority of people today rate Lewis ahead of Frazier and Foreman. Your opinion is in the minority. Frazier is often not even in the top 10 these days whereas Lewis seems to be a general consensus top 5.

I have a difficult time imagining a prime Lewis losing to any hw of any era.

Lewis was not only more dominant than either of them he beat twice as many ranked opponents and avenged his defeats. Foreman never avenged any of his losses and Frazier lost the trilogy to Ali and never avenged the Foreman defeats.

Your fallback would be the eras argument but most people today rank the 90s as being on par or better than the 70s so again you don't have much of a case it seems.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:54 Lewis was not only more dominant than either of them he beat twice as many ranked opponents and avenged his sole defeats. Foreman never avenged any of his losses and Frazier lost the trilogy to Ali and never avenged the Foreman defeat.

Your fallback would be the eras argument but most people today rank the 90s as being on par or better than the 70s so again you don't have much of a case it seems.

I have the same case as you. Read my post. I can't imagine a prime Lewis losing to any hw of any era.

Priceless. You can't imagine him losing to Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Louis etc. Wow. I mean wow.

Btw- He lost twice in his own era. Can you imagine that?

Foreman lost to Al and Young. Frazier lost to Ali and Foreman. That's not exactly the same as losing to Hasim Rahman and Oliver McCall. Frazier and Foreman each have wins far greater than anything Lennox Lewis ever came up with.
Lewis did avenge the losses to Rahman and McCall. What phenomenal achievements.
(So I guess the McCall win counts for Lewis and Bryd's over Klitschko doesn't. Love it.)

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 12:35 Priceless. You can't imagine him losing to Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Louis etc. Wow. I mean wow.

Btw- He lost twice in his own era. Can you imagine that?

Foreman lost to Al and Young. Frazier lost to Ali and Foreman. That's not exactly the same as losing to Hasim Rahman and Oliver McCall. Frazier and Foreman each have wins far greater than anything Lennox Lewis ever came up with.
Lewis did avenge the losses to Rahman and McCall. What phenomenal achievements.
(So I guess the McCall win counts for Lewis and Bryd's over Klitschko doesn't. Love it.)

You can wow all you want. Lewis' "win" over McCall was a joke, but it doesn't change my view. Thank you.

Bad enough that you can imagine him beating Ali or some of the other greats. How old are you any way?

It's also unbelievable that you can't imagine something that has actually happened. Twice.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 13:00 Bad enough that you can imagine him beating Ali or some of the other greats. How old are you any way?

It's also unbelievable that you can't imagine something that has actually happened. Twice.

Of course I know he got beaten twice. I'm probably older than you by the way. Lewis in his prime would've been too big; too strong; and frankly more than enough skill to beat the prior generations of HW's. It's believable that he PROBABLY would have. Stop being cantankerous.

Lewis is the best ever. People point at his loses without acknowledging the circumstances. Everyone had their losses, Lewis had main losses to himself. He was so f*cking good, that the nature took a part of his dedication from him. But well-prepared Lewis would have handled anybody.

DrDuke wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 13:04 Lewis is the best ever. People point at his loses without acknowledging the circumstances. Everyone had their losses, Lewis had main losses to himself. He was so f*cking good, that the nature took a part of his dedication from him. But well-prepared Lewis would have handled anybody.

Great perspective from ESPN Article:
Ali vs. Lennox Lewis

Size, styles and psychology would all have played a big part in this fight.

Lewis, while not nearly as fluid or as fast as Ali, was a very big heavyweight at 6-foot-5 and around 245 pounds. Ali would have been the small man in the fight.

Ali's taunting of an opponent, the undermining of the other man's confidence, might not have worked against Lewis, who had a sort of professional remoteness.

Ali would have needed all his skill, moving Lewis around, seeking to get off first with the jab, darting in to score and sliding out, scoring in bursts. He did this and made it look easy against 6-foot-6 Ernie Terrell, but Lewis was a much bigger-framed, technically superior fighter and clearly a bigger puncher than the long and lanky Terrell.

Lewis' long-reaching left jab could have given Ali problems, and his right hand would have been a threat throughout the bout. Lewis, steady and calculating, would have been confident in his size and power and wouldn't have been intimidated. He could have timed his left hand, enabling him to match jabs with Ali. Lewis might even have outjabbed him, as Ken Norton was able to do.

Ali would have had to take some solid right hands, and his fake wobble wouldn't have rattled Lewis, who would simply have waited for an opportune moment to unload another thudding shot.

It's doubtful that Lewis would have lunged off-balance in his attempts to land the right; he would have held the center of the ring and waited for Ali to take risks.

In terms of style, and always bearing in mind the size difference, I think that the much bigger Lewis might have been completely wrong for Ali.

Verdict: Lewis on points in a tactical match without many thrills.

A great perspective indeed, I've always seen such picture of their hypothetical bout as the most probable one.

DrDuke wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 13:14 A great perspective indeed, I've always seen such picture of their hypothetical bout as the most probable one.

I'm glad I found it. It really appears to be how I would see it as well.

Actually it's a horrible perspective.

Lewis right hand would be trouble? Ali was completely unfazed by Foreman's right. Lewis was a hard puncher but other fighters were unfazed by his power.
They could fight 10X and Lewis would not stop him.
Reach? Liston's reach advantage meant nothing.
Ali's would be hitting Lewis a lot more than Lewis would be hitting him.

A prime Ali was all wrong for Lewis. He was simply too good.

And someone one can fathom Holmes out boxing him. And Foreman knocking him into queer street. And Joe Louis beating him in any number of ways.
The sport didn't begin with Lennox Lewis.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 16:37 Actually it's a horrible perspective.

Lewis right hand would be trouble? Ali was completely unfazed by Foreman's right. Lewis was a hard puncher but other fighters were unfazed by his power.
They could fight 10X and Lewis would not stop him.
Reach? Liston's reach advantage meant nothing.
Ali's would be hitting Lewis a lot more than Lewis would be hitting him.

A prime Ali was all wrong for Lewis. He was simply too good.

And someone one can fathom Holmes out boxing him. And Foreman knocking him into queer street. And Joe Louis beating him in any number of ways.
The sport didn't begin with Lennox Lewis.

Okidokie! Next!

Lewis has an absolutely huge advantage in resume depth which is more than enough to offset Frazier having a better top win. If top win was all that matters than Max Schmelling is better than Muhammad Ali and Randy Turpin is better than Sugar Ray Leonard.

Lewis beat about 12 guys ranked in the top 10 compared to Foreman's 5 and Frazier's 6/7. He also dominated the division for a number of years while Foreman was never even the best heavyweight in the world at any point in time, much less dominating a division.

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:23

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:19 I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

You can't possibly use Klitchko here. An injury win when he was well ahead of Byrd up to that point. Tsk tsk tsk, not a good one.

Much worse is using his losses as clear wins. Byrd was not a bad loss, but it wasn't a good one.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 03:53

oogiebe wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:23

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2019, 17:19 I will give you a hint; Byrd's also beat a guy whose brother was a fighter too.
And yes, I think the heavyweight division has been dreadful since the early 2000s.

You can't possibly use Klitchko here. An injury win when he was well ahead of Byrd up to that point. Tsk tsk tsk, not a good one.

Much worse is using his losses as clear wins. Byrd was not a bad loss, but it wasn't a good one.

Agreed. My point is that Byrd was being practically shutout. An injury lost the fight for Vitali. A loss is a loss, but based on performance, it showed a lack of toughness to finish the fight, which speaks to Vitali's heart (or his seconds). Again, a loss is a loss. Just a bad one to develop good comp.

And I completely disagree that Byrd was practically being shut out. Byrd only lost two rounds clearly in that fight. It was a close fight; I had Byrd up by a point; many people were surprised at the judges scorecards at the time.