BoxRec

One reason why Lewis wasn't as popular as he
could have been; he wasn't that gracious after
a fight.

Tua - It'll take more than a left hook and a haircut to deal with the likes of me.

Holyfield - He has three punches, his right, his left and his head.

Rachman - Now he's has been Rachman.

Klitchko - I'll bust up the other side of his face.

Part of that is due to his personality. Most popular champions were either the guys who were nice and humble (Foreman II), or who had image of "bad guys" like Tyson or Foreman I. Lewis was never involved in any scandal inside or outside the ring, behaved well at press conferences (until provoked) and so on. He was, however, quite cocky as you noticed, which didn't help his image.

And another part of his lack of popularity is due to his style. He was utilizing his skills and size, while his chin was a bit of a problem. He therefore was never in wars like Holy-Bowe (which gave huge boost to Holy's popularity, even if he lost the whole trilogy), he never won a fight after being down himself (like Holyfield, Foreman, Marziano... well, almost any champion... he even never continued after being down) and so on. It is true he destroyed some of his opponents in no time (Golota, Grant), but some of his fights were simply boring (Mavrovic, Tua).

gregor wrote:Part of that is due to his personality. Most popular champions were either the guys who were nice and humble (Foreman II), or who had image of "bad guys" like Tyson or Foreman I. Lewis was never involved in any scandal inside or outside the ring, behaved well at press conferences (until provoked) and so on. He was, however, quite cocky as you noticed, which didn't help his image.

And another part of his lack of popularity is due to his style. He was utilizing his skills and size, while his chin was a bit of a problem. He therefore was never in wars like Holy-Bowe (which gave huge boost to Holy's popularity, even if he lost the whole trilogy), he never won a fight after being down himself (like Holyfield, Foreman, Marziano... well, almost any champion... he even never continued after being down) and so on. It is true he destroyed some of his opponents in no time (Golota, Grant), but some of his fights were simply boring (Mavrovic, Tua).

More fights like Mercer, & fewer like Tua, would've helped. Too risky, though, & you can't fault Lewis for that. His two biggest tests of chin & recuperative ability, he failed. He fought to his strengths & won, but he was never going to attain great popularity. He was arrogant at times, but not an engaging type of arrogant.

I think Lennox was one of the best.
Great jab, hard right when he threw it. He didn't like
to exchange and normally didn't need to. But he
took a few BIG punches, like Tua, Vitali, Mercer, Briggs
and kept going. He did get surprised a couple times
but that was part of the cockiness too.
At least he had the guts to rematch everybody who beat him.

snake33 wrote:I think Lennox was one of the best.
Great jab, hard right when he threw it. He didn't like
to exchange and normally didn't need to. But he
took a few BIG punches, like Tua, Vitali, Mercer, Briggs
and kept going. He did get surprised a couple times
but that was part of the cockiness too.
At least he had the guts to rematch everybody who beat him.

All fair enough. I actually think he's kind of over-rated in history, but not dramatically so. He's a top-ten or twelve all-timer for me, & that's no mean feat. When I see him in the top-five or so, though --- yeesh.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

snake33 wrote:I think Lennox was one of the best.
Great jab, hard right when he threw it. He didn't like
to exchange and normally didn't need to. But he
took a few BIG punches, like Tua, Vitali, Mercer, Briggs
and kept going. He did get surprised a couple times
but that was part of the cockiness too.
At least he had the guts to rematch everybody who beat him.

All fair enough. I actually think he's kind of over-rated in history, but not dramatically so. He's a top-ten or twelve all-timer for me, & that's no mean feat. When I see him in the top-five or so, though --- yeesh.

Not as over-rated as Tyson or anybody now.

gregor wrote:He was, however, quite cocky as you noticed, which didn't help his image.

Cockiness and trash-talking are quite common in boxing and it doesn't necessarily hurt your image. But to do that, you just have to have some style and consistency to convince people you think seriously.

Quotes that snake mentioned just didn't go well with Lennox's image. Most of the time he was playing some laid-back Englishman and then suddenly tried to show people he was actually one of those "I can whup all of 'em" guys. It just doesn't work that way, you can't be both. Another thing that I found unconvincing about him was utterly hilarious gimmick in the studio with Rahman, trying to make some kind of remake of Ali-Frazier confrontation..

Ali showed how to trash-talk, although even he was unsuccesful at winning simpathies from the beginning. But he did it with vividness, flamboyancy and decent sense of humour and it worked perfectly, when folks got used to it.


Oh and of course as gregor mentioned, Lewis raised some questions about his chin throughout his career, which isn't treated very kindly by most boxing fans.

snake33 wrote:One reason why Lewis wasn't as popular as he
could have been; he wasn't that gracious after
a fight.

Tua - It'll take more than a left hook and a haircut to deal with the likes of me.

Holyfield - He has three punches, his right, his left and his head.

Rachman - Now he's has been Rachman.

Klitchko - I'll bust up the other side of his face.

I'll agree Lewis did come across arrogant at times... but what boxer doesn't?
Lewis isnt a patch on what came out of someone like James Toneys mouth!
I think Lewis' lack of popularity was more to do with him being a quieter laid back personality than someone like Tyson, who was such an over the top character.

I think Rahman deserved that comment... come on Rachman was out trash-talked lewis before their 2nd fight.... so why wouldnt Lewis have a pot shot back after his victory?
As for Holy... well that comment is true... how many fighters have complained about Evanders butting over the years?

also i think it was because he wasnt alligned with 1 country - jamaica, canada or england.

i remember a spitting image episode where they did harry carinter saying and the canadian is looking good and hes interupted by the other comentator saying hes just won hes british

Heartbreak_Kid79 wrote:

snake33 wrote:One reason why Lewis wasn't as popular as he
could have been; he wasn't that gracious after
a fight.

Tua - It'll take more than a left hook and a haircut to deal with the likes of me.

Holyfield - He has three punches, his right, his left and his head.

Rachman - Now he's has been Rachman.

Klitchko - I'll bust up the other side of his face.

I'll agree Lewis did come across arrogant at times... but what boxer doesn't?
Lewis isnt a patch on what came out of someone like James Toneys mouth!
I think Lewis' lack of popularity was more to do with him being a quieter laid back personality than someone like Tyson, who was such an over the top character.

I think Rahman deserved that comment... come on Rachman was out trash-talked lewis before their 2nd fight.... so why wouldnt Lewis have a pot shot back after his victory?
As for Holy... well that comment is true... how many fighters have complained about Evanders butting over the years?

Personally, I thought those comments were great. They all came after a post-fight
interviewer pissed Lennox off. And yes, Rachman was a jerk, Holy always fought kinda
dirty and the 'Left hook and a haircut' comment was classic.

Lewis tended to keep his cool outside the ring, letting his opponents do most of the trash talking. After outboxing them or KOing them he would let off some steam.

How many British fighters reach a high level of popularity in the states? Not many. It's a cultural thing.

On the surface Lewis was very uncomfortable in the limelight since his natural persona seemed to be a quiet introspective one. I think though it had more to do with the fact he just wasnt a warm or social kind of guy and pretty much a bottom line sort.

He wasnt a bad body and he wasnt a nice guy either. Lewis just wasnt a social guy thats what it boils down to. He had great difficulty relaxing in front of the camera which makes you wonder why the hell he insisted on doing so many "colour" commentaries in his career (as early as 1991 he did the ruddock-tyson one in the UK) since he had so little to say and much less of it interesting.

What we had with Lewis was a personality similar to Joe Calzaghe's in his earlier year in that both seemed to have a chip on their shoulder and make obnoxious comments when a camera was put in front of them. Both lacked social skills and empathy and humour in their personality (at least in front of the camera).

I remember Mohammed Ali being presented with a BBC award in the early 2000's and Holyfield and Lewis being on hand to stand on stage with Ali. The whole audience was on its feet, and Holyfiled was smiling like a 10 year old kid and clapping furiously for Ali seemingly excited to be in the presence of the great man. Lewis just stood aloof on the sidelines poker faced.....says it all.

Lewis somehow felt it neccesary to call perhaps one of the 5 most beloved UK sportsmen of all time in Frank Bruno , an "uncle tom" and start a bitter feud in the press. Thats one of the reasons Lewis was never really liked in the UK until around the last few years of his career.
He also had a nasty cocky side to his personality and never gave praise to opponents.

[quote="gregor"]Part of that is due to his personality. Most popular champions were either the guys who were nice and humble (Foreman II), or who had image of "bad guys" like Tyson or Foreman I. Lewis was never involved in any scandal inside or outside the ring, behaved well at press conferences (until provoked) and so on. He was, however, quite cocky as you noticed, which didn't help his image.

And another part of his lack of popularity is due to his style. He was utilizing his skills and size, while his chin was a bit of a problem. He therefore was never in wars like Holy-Bowe (which gave huge boost to Holy's popularity, even if he lost the whole trilogy), he never won a fight after being down himself (like Holyfield, Foreman, Marziano... well, almost any champion... he even never continued after being down) and so on. It is true he destroyed some of his opponents in no time (Golota, Grant), but some of his fights were simply boring (Mavrovic, Tua).[/quote]

I am from the US, which seems to matter in this discussion because the UK guys may have more of a "personal" view than I do. I respect LL - who didn't he beat that he could have fought? For me, he is sort of like the Klits but better. He certainly wasn't in the best shape and he was at the end of his career when he beat Vit Klit. For all of Vit's posturing, LL had busted up his face - it wasn't an accident. And, LL was coming on against Vit. So, I think, in good shape LL would have won very convincingly against Vit.

The Klits seem to be getting more and more respect. But, I think LL was similar but better. Used his size, kept his distance, excellent right hand...

Also, for me, he wasn't an engaging sort of guy but seemed like a nice guy. Who could have beaten LL? I think, due to his size, style, he would have given Ali all sorts of problems (Ali in my view depended upon his size and reach as well as his speed - and LL was a bigger man). I also think he would have beaten Joe Frazier (one of my favorites) and I think he would have controlled George Foreman (another one of my favorites) - of course, if George landed it would have been all over!!

So, in 3 fights, who could have beaten LL, two out of three?

And, again, a decent sort of guy.

I liked him (bit boring as a commentator).

Lewis would never wake up from the first fight with Foreman. There would be no opportunity for either man to take two from three.

[quote="Goodnight, Irene"]Lewis would never wake up from the first fight with Foreman. There would be no opportunity for either man to take two from three.[/quote]
Hey, at least when LL went down he stayed down - never took a lot of punishment.
If they fought I would root for George. But, George also didn't have the best chin. We will never know. But, over 3 fights I would go with LL - LL knew his assets and limitations and fought accordingly.

TigerMoth wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Lewis would never wake up from the first fight with Foreman. There would be no opportunity for either man to take two from three.

Hey, at least when LL went down he stayed down - never took a lot of punishment.
If they fought I would root for George. But, George also didn't have the best chin. We will never know. But, over 3 fights I would go with LL - LL knew his assets and limitations and fought accordingly.

Which fights indicate Foreman lacked chin? I find that difficult to believe.

[quote="Goodnight, Irene"][quote="TigerMoth"][quote="Goodnight, Irene"]Lewis would never wake up from the first fight with Foreman. There would be no opportunity for either man to take two from three.[/quote]
Hey, at least when LL went down he stayed down - never took a lot of punishment.
If they fought I would root for George. But, George also didn't have the best chin. We will never know. But, over 3 fights I would go with LL - LL knew his assets and limitations and fought accordingly.[/quote]

Which fights indicate Foreman lacked chin? I find that difficult to believe.[/quote]
OK - I have read enough of your posts to know you are very intelligent. So, we both know that Ali didn't KO George per se - George was exhausted and ready to fall over on his own. But, Ron Lyle (big puncher, I know) put George down twice. So, George went down more times than LL.

Did LL have a chin problem? I don't know - Rahman's punch was picture perfect and McCall, aside from drug and perhaps mental illness problems, was a monster.

As I said, I would root for George. But, I think, due to LL's size and ability he would be able to keep George at a distance and get a decision or KO if George ran out of gas.

So, how do you see a George/LL fight going?

McCall & Rahman were both good punchers, but I always had the feeling Lewis fans built them up into something they were not --- genuine monster hitters. Lyle was a more debilitating puncher than either of them, & he's the only man to actively hurt Foreman between 1969-77. Ali & Young, plainly & as you're well-versed enough to understand, scored exhaustion-assisted knockdowns on a tiring Foreman. I will say this for Lewis --- the shots which KO'd him were indeed just about perfect in terms of placement. While both are sometimes over-rated as hitters as I stated, the punches each man landed to floor Lewis maximised their output. I still don't believe either would've ended Foreman's night, though.

As for the fight itself, I have a real problem with Lewis movement. Though it was quite sound in terms of positioning, he was a 6'5", 245lb. man at his peak (around 1997-02, in my book), & he was not especially elusive as a result. Most of his opponents were small & conservative enough to be manoeuvred by his jab, or tied up. I don't think Foreman, who started like a hurricane & would not be out-muscled by Lewis, would have a difficult time finding Lewis as a physical target. That's a big problem, because Foreman can afford to be frustrated by Lewis, drop a round or two to Lewis, & be taken out of his rhythm --- for a while, at least. During this time, though, Foreman needs only one good punch, just one, to either out-right level Lewis for the count, or render him available for the kill.

Don't misunderstand me --- the fact I think Foreman blows Lewis out is somewhat misleading. Lewis has most of the necessary tools to defeat Foreman. He just happens to lack chin & recuperative ability, & for a fighter not too quick on his feet, that's absolutely fatal. Lewis could well beat some great fighters Foreman would struggle against or out-right lose to, though.

FACT when manny steward took over training LL 1st thing he did was ask LL to watch foreman tapes

Goodnight, Irene...you said "Most of [Lewis's] opponents were small & conservative enough to be manoeuvred by his jab"

You may have forgotten one or two guys, such as Ruddock, Tucker, Briggs, Golota, Akinwande, Klitschko, Bruno and Grant.

Shazam! wrote:Goodnight, Irene...you said "Most of [Lewis's] opponents were small & conservative enough to be manoeuvred by his jab"

You may have forgotten one or two guys, such as Ruddock, Tucker, Briggs, Golota, Akinwande, Klitschko, Bruno and Grant.

Does that equate to the majority?

Shazam! wrote:Goodnight, Irene...you said "Most of [Lewis's] opponents were small & conservative enough to be manoeuvred by his jab"

You may have forgotten one or two guys, such as Ruddock, Tucker, Briggs, Golota, Akinwande, Klitschko, Bruno and Grant.

Thats a hefty proportion of some of Lewis's best wins. Obviously Tyson and Holyfield were smaller older guys.

Lewis's demolition of Grant was Foremanesque. Grant had the same bemused look as Ken Norton did on the ropes.

TigerMoth wrote:So, in 3 fights, who could have beaten LL, two out of three?

I think there is a couple of fighters who I would favour in a trilogy against Lewis, or at least would give them good chance to win it.

Holyfield. If his past-prime version could almost make it a draw, I think prime Holyfield wins a decision over LL. The problem with a trilogy could be that Holy even in his prime was plagued by heart problems, hepatisis, and so on.

Foreman. Clumsy and somewhat slow, but he as some already mentioned can take some punishment and needs to land just one or two good punches to end the fight. LL had good defence, but if Briggs could penetrate it I do not see why not Foreman.

Mercer. Some may argue he didn't face prime LL, but IMO styles makes fights and Mercer was able to neutralize Lewis' jab most of the time and make it at least close fight most of the time.

Adamj1987 wrote:also i think it was because he wasnt alligned with 1 country - jamaica, canada or england.

i remember a spitting image episode where they did harry carinter saying and the canadian is looking good and hes interupted by the other comentator saying hes just won hes british

You hit the nail on the head. Did he ever make his mind up what he was? - British, Canadian or Jamaican?

MIG wrote:

Adamj1987 wrote:also i think it was because he wasnt alligned with 1 country - jamaica, canada or england.

i remember a spitting image episode where they did harry carinter saying and the canadian is looking good and hes interupted by the other comentator saying hes just won hes british

You hit the nail on the head. Did he ever make his mind up what he was? - British, Canadian or Jamaican?

Yes - the answer just depended on whether he was in Britain, US/Canada or Jamaica at the time . . . DD