BoxRec

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 05:30**

Lennox Lewis believes current heavyweight champions Anthony Joshua and Deontay Wilder cannot be compared to the division’s greats because they are “under-developed”.

The former undisputed king of the division believes the pair’s lack of amateur experience means they cannot be lined up alongside other eras yet.

And Lewis also reckons the sport’s once glamour division is currently a “lacklustre” one.

Current IBF, IBO and WBA champion Joshua won Olympic gold and world amateur silver before turning pro in 2013 but only started boxing at 18.

While WBC title holder Wilder was also a late starter at 19 in 2005 before he won bronze at the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and then turned professional in the same year.

Both fighters had limited experience at elite senior level in the amateur ranks despite their exceptional success before turning pro.

“There’s been a lot of talk recently about historical comparisons of heavyweights of older generations to heavyweights of the new generation,” Lewis said on his official website.

“I’ve been asked on many occasions where I stand on this debate; my perspective is that more experience in amateur bouts makes for a more seasoned and skilled professional.

“It’s not my intention to knock or take away from any of today’s fighters, nor is it my intention to overly glorify fighters of the past.

“When you look at the state of today’s heavyweight division you have a group of young up-and-coming talent who are basically still learning and perfecting their craft at the championship level.

“Yeah, it adds excitement to the division, but I still haven’t seen what I would call the clear cut 'last man standing.'

“It feels like the state of the division has a lot of under-developed champions that must now learn on the job.

“The talent in the division isn’t what it used to be, but the playing field is much more level than any time in the last 10 years.

“This adds excitement to a lacklustre division as we wait to see who becomes the last man standing - if there will be one at all but we are a long way from making historical comparisons.

“Let’s wait to see who’s really been taking notes among the current heavyweight crop. Don’t be surprised that it might not be the one you think.”

Lewis spent much longer in the unpaid ranks than the division’s top two stars today, winning a world junior title in 1983 before representing Canada at the 1984 Olympics.

He lost to eventual gold medalist Tyrell Biggs in the quarter-finals before winning gold himself at super-heavyweight four years later at the Seoul Games.

The British boxing icon said: “Most of the top heavyweight fighters today don’t come from a pedigree that has a long amateur career.

“If you look at Deontay Wilder and Anthony Joshua, both competed in the Olympics and won medals, but they also didn’t have extensive amateur careers to build up on before turning pro.

“What they did have was amateur success in the form of gold and bronze medals.

“Generally, these are things that translate into launching pads for professional careers and it’s no different in the case of Joshua and Wilder. I used my success in the 1988 Olympics to do the same.

“However, my setbacks in the 1984 Olympics, caused me to step back and re-evaluate, and I chose to hone my skills further as an amateur, pursuing that gold medal ticket for another four years.

“As I progressed in my amateur career, I picked up a ton of valuable experience that would pay dividends for me as a pro.

“Along that road, the Olympic gold-medal became my only goal. I vowed to get back to the Olympics and win it in 88!

“As an amateur, I was a pugilist. When I turned pro, I became the “pugilist specialist” by specifically preparing for each fighter I faced.

“My extensive amateur experience showed me how to face and deal with any type of opponent. I fought over 90+ amateur fights.

“Evander Holyfield fought over 160. It’s not a coincidence that we were the best of our generation. By comparison, Joshua, Wilder and Tyson Fury each had about 50 or less total amateur bouts.

“Amateur pedigree makes a difference because this is where you hone your craft. You learn to face different styles and different physical types of fighters.

“You also learn these things as a pro, but with a limited amateur background you have to be more cautious in the pros because you haven’t learnt some of the tricks of the trade.

“You have to be more concerned as you don’t want to get too far ahead, or stay too underdeveloped, as you make your way up, knowing one loss can derail a fast moving career.”

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 06:34**

I agree with him. Having a solid foundation is good.

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 07:04**

(Duplicate)

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 07:08**

Totally agree. Wilder is horrible. Joshua I think will have to lose before addressing his shortcomings.

Wilder doesn't make it into the top 10 in the tough and talent rich 1990s. Difficult to guage AJ at this moment, but don't think he'd trouble the top guys.

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 09:41**

He's bang on. Deontay didn't really pay heed to this invaluable lesson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPJMn7izjOM

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 11:00**

I agree with him

Joshua is under developed as he’s basically still a novice having not fought many pro rounds

Wilder is under developed as he’s still technically raw

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 11:03**

Ossyrules wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 11:00 I agree with him

Joshua is under developed as he’s basically still a novice having not fought many pro rounds

Wilder is under developed as he’s still technically raw

Agreed!

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 12:20**

Both novices wearing world champions clothing. If this was 1998, I'd say give AJ at least 15 more fights before challenging for a world title

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 12:55**

danconnollyeire wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:20 Both novices wearing world champions clothing. If this was 1998, I'd say give AJ at least 15 more fights before challenging for a world title

There are a lot of HW's out there.. But seems that fights can't be made..

I agree, it it was the 90's, after 20 fights, Joshua would still be defending his British title.

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 13:07**

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:55
danconnollyeire wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:20 Both novices wearing world champions clothing. If this was 1998, I'd say give AJ at least 15 more fights before challenging for a world title
There are a lot of HW's out there.. But seems that fights can't be made..

I agree, it it was the 90's, after 20 fights, Joshua would still be defending his British title.

Did anyone here actually live through the 90s?

Looking back now it seems we had some good heavies - Tyson, Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield being at the forefront, with your Bruno, McCall, Morrison, Mercer being on the fringes but at the time everyone was saying how bad the heavies were and saying they aren't like they were in the 1970's!

I guess history eventually views things differently!

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 13:13**

Kilsby wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 13:07
Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:55
danconnollyeire wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:20 Both novices wearing world champions clothing. If this was 1998, I'd say give AJ at least 15 more fights before challenging for a world title
There are a lot of HW's out there.. But seems that fights can't be made..

I agree, it it was the 90's, after 20 fights, Joshua would still be defending his British title.
Did anyone here actually live through the 90s?

Looking back now it seems we had some good heavies - Tyson, Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield being at the forefront, with your Bruno, McCall, Morrison, Mercer being on the fringes but at the time everyone was saying how bad the heavies were and saying they aren't like they were in the 1970's!

I guess history eventually views things differently!

In 10 years from now, young fans will look at Wilder's record and think WOW! We are living through it, so we don't give the boxers credit.

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 13:15**

Kilsby wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 13:07
Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:55
danconnollyeire wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 12:20 Both novices wearing world champions clothing. If this was 1998, I'd say give AJ at least 15 more fights before challenging for a world title
There are a lot of HW's out there.. But seems that fights can't be made..

I agree, it it was the 90's, after 20 fights, Joshua would still be defending his British title.
Did anyone here actually live through the 90s?

Looking back now it seems we had some good heavies - Tyson, Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield being at the forefront, with your Bruno, McCall, Morrison, Mercer being on the fringes but at the time everyone was saying how bad the heavies were and saying they aren't like they were in the 1970's!

I guess history eventually views things differently!

I lived thru the 90s and it was definitely better standard than today

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 13:42**

The 90s were very exciting at the time, and great in retrospect. King's finagling the three belts into the hands of Botha, Seldon and Bruno was a low, but, unlike today, that level of fighter wasn't the best. There was Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis, Moorer, Morrison, Mercer, Spoon, Ruddock, etc etc

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 16:04**

Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 13:42 The 90s were very exciting at the time, and great in retrospect. King's finagling the three belts into the hands of Botha, Seldon and Bruno was a low, but, unlike today, that level of fighter wasn't the best. There was Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis, Moorer, Morrison, Mercer, Spoon, Ruddock, etc etc

Here's how they 80s, 90s played out....

Mike Tyson came along in the mid 80s blowing everyone away. When he got to the top, beating an aging former retired champ (Holmes) and a light heavy (Spinks) he looked indestructible. They criticism levelled at Tyson by the purists was he had cleaned out a weak division of has-beens and never weres.

Still he was regarded as the premier fighter in the division. Tyson got beat by Douglas in 1990 (biggest shock in boxing history) Tyson came out and said something like "I had an off night, didn't take the fight serious etc. etc. I'm still the best heavyweight on the planet and will get the titles back" or words to that effect.

We all believed him.

Anyway, the rape case and Tyson gets banged up in 1991.

With Mike inside the heavyweight division died - Mike Tyson WAS heavyweight boxing at the time.

These other guys fighting for the titles were merely pretenders to the throne... Inferior opposition we all thought.

Anyway, it didn't turn out that way with Holyfield & Lewis both proving to be superior, but we didn't know that at the time.

So back to how it happened. With Tyson banged up for 4 years the titles got passed around like confetti at a wedding. Holyfield to Bowe, Bowe to Holyfield, Holyfield to Moorer, Moorer to a 40 year old Foreman plus fringe contenders picking up belts like Morrison, Bennt, Hide, Seldon, Lewis, McCall, Bruno, among others. Hell even Axel Schule was laying claim to the throne! The whole scene was deemed a sorry mess.

When Tyson got out in 95 he was supposed to restore order to the division. And it looked like he would when he quickly picked up 2 belts from Bruce Seldon & Frank Bruno.

Anyway, we all know he was eventually sorted out by Holyfield (twice) and put back in his box for good by Lennox.

But living through the 90s it was deemed a giant mess at the time. But looking back now even heavyweights like Tua and late 90s heavyweights like the Klitschkos were coming through so add them to the mix of names I've previously mentioned and now its rightly deemed a talent rich era.

But we didn't know that at the time

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 17:48**

Where I lived, the 90's was recognized as a great time for heavyweight boxing while it was going on and I knew evander would beat Mike when he was a cruiser. One thing I'll disagree with Lennox on is that Wilder is fully developed. He's just not skilled. He's like an athletic bonecrusher.

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 17:56**

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 17:48 Where I lived, the 90's was recognized as a great time for heavyweight boxing while it was going on and I knew evander would beat Mike when he was a cruiser. One thing I'll disagree with Lennox on is that Wilder is fully developed. He's just not skilled. He's like an athletic bonecrusher.

I agree. Aside from the spindly legs, Wilder is a great athlete. His problem is that his balance is shocking and his technique varies between poor and non-existant.

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 18:50**

https://youtu.be/GF2jfzBaDWo

A good video heavyweights in the 90s

Posted: **02 Nov 2017, 18:51**

https://youtu.be/GF2jfzBaDWo

A good video heavyweights in the 90s

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 01:23**

I agree that in retrospect the 90s era was a strong one, especially compared to today.

The biggest difference is the lack of top quality American heavyweights these days. It was a pretty rich talent pool back then.

It's strange to think that now the Heavyweight scene is more global the overall quality is much poorer.

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 05:48**

ewenhay wrote: ↑03 Nov 2017, 01:23 I agree that in retrospect the 90s era was a strong one, especially compared to today.

The biggest difference is the lack of top quality American heavyweights these days. It was a pretty rich talent pool back then.

It's strange to think that now the Heavyweight scene is more global the overall quality is much poorer.

For a tall, strong athlete in the USA, the NFL/NBA are a much bigger draw these days.

It's a vicious circle, the lack of good American heavyweights means there is less interest, therefore less money which makes boxing an even less attractive option and so it goes on.

The USA is quite well represented at the lower weights (11 of the top 20 lb for lb on Boxrec are American, Mexican or Canadian) but for the big lads, why get punched in the head for a living when there are easier, more lucrative options out there?

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 09:24**

Kilsby wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 16:04
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 13:42 The 90s were very exciting at the time, and great in retrospect. King's finagling the three belts into the hands of Botha, Seldon and Bruno was a low, but, unlike today, that level of fighter wasn't the best. There was Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis, Moorer, Morrison, Mercer, Spoon, Ruddock, etc etc
Here's how they 80s, 90s played out....

Mike Tyson came along in the mid 80s blowing everyone away. When he got to the top, beating an aging former retired champ (Holmes) and a light heavy (Spinks) he looked indestructible. They criticism levelled at Tyson by the purists was he had cleaned out a weak division of has-beens and never weres.

Still he was regarded as the premier fighter in the division. Tyson got beat by Douglas in 1990 (biggest shock in boxing history) Tyson came out and said something like "I had an off night, didn't take the fight serious etc. etc. I'm still the best heavyweight on the planet and will get the titles back" or words to that effect.

We all believed him.

Anyway, the rape case and Tyson gets banged up in 1991.

With Mike inside the heavyweight division died - Mike Tyson WAS heavyweight boxing at the time.

These other guys fighting for the titles were merely pretenders to the throne... Inferior opposition we all thought.

Anyway, it didn't turn out that way with Holyfield & Lewis both proving to be superior, but we didn't know that at the time.

So back to how it happened. With Tyson banged up for 4 years the titles got passed around like confetti at a wedding. Holyfield to Bowe, Bowe to Holyfield, Holyfield to Moorer, Moorer to a 40 year old Foreman plus fringe contenders picking up belts like Morrison, Bennt, Hide, Seldon, Lewis, McCall, Bruno, among others. Hell even Axel Schule was laying claim to the throne! The whole scene was deemed a sorry mess.

When Tyson got out in 95 he was supposed to restore order to the division. And it looked like he would when he quickly picked up 2 belts from Bruce Seldon & Frank Bruno.

Anyway, we all know he was eventually sorted out by Holyfield (twice) and put back in his box for good by Lennox.

But living through the 90s it was deemed a giant mess at the time. But looking back now even heavyweights like Tua and late 90s heavyweights like the Klitschkos were coming through so add them to the mix of names I've previously mentioned and now its rightly deemed a talent rich era.

But we didn't know that at the time

Well, you've certainly taken Steve Bunce's crown of worst writer of boxing histories.

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 09:54**

actually i think kilsby pretty accurately described how the scene was generally judged at the time.
there were some great fighters like holy and lewis slipping up at times and the whole mess wasnt really sorted until lewis decisioned holyfield.
the belt holder heavyweights are all younger and more inexperienced than the 90s bunch right now, but that should make for some good unification fights if they happen.

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 09:57**

fanman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2017, 09:54 actually i think kilsby pretty accurately described how the scene was generally judged at the time.
there were some great fighters like holy and lewis slipping up at times and the whole mess wasnt really sorted until lewis decisioned holyfield.
the belt holder heavyweights are all younger and more inexperienced than the 90s bunch right now, but that should make for some good unification fights if they happen.

Cheers Fanman,

You was obviously there too - right in the middle of the Holyfield Vs Bowe fight

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 09:58**

Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑03 Nov 2017, 09:24
Kilsby wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 16:04
Tuan_Jim wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 13:42 The 90s were very exciting at the time, and great in retrospect. King's finagling the three belts into the hands of Botha, Seldon and Bruno was a low, but, unlike today, that level of fighter wasn't the best. There was Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis, Moorer, Morrison, Mercer, Spoon, Ruddock, etc etc
Here's how they 80s, 90s played out....

Mike Tyson came along in the mid 80s blowing everyone away. When he got to the top, beating an aging former retired champ (Holmes) and a light heavy (Spinks) he looked indestructible. They criticism levelled at Tyson by the purists was he had cleaned out a weak division of has-beens and never weres.

Still he was regarded as the premier fighter in the division. Tyson got beat by Douglas in 1990 (biggest shock in boxing history) Tyson came out and said something like "I had an off night, didn't take the fight serious etc. etc. I'm still the best heavyweight on the planet and will get the titles back" or words to that effect.

We all believed him.

Anyway, the rape case and Tyson gets banged up in 1991.

With Mike inside the heavyweight division died - Mike Tyson WAS heavyweight boxing at the time.

These other guys fighting for the titles were merely pretenders to the throne... Inferior opposition we all thought.

Anyway, it didn't turn out that way with Holyfield & Lewis both proving to be superior, but we didn't know that at the time.

So back to how it happened. With Tyson banged up for 4 years the titles got passed around like confetti at a wedding. Holyfield to Bowe, Bowe to Holyfield, Holyfield to Moorer, Moorer to a 40 year old Foreman plus fringe contenders picking up belts like Morrison, Bennt, Hide, Seldon, Lewis, McCall, Bruno, among others. Hell even Axel Schule was laying claim to the throne! The whole scene was deemed a sorry mess.

When Tyson got out in 95 he was supposed to restore order to the division. And it looked like he would when he quickly picked up 2 belts from Bruce Seldon & Frank Bruno.

Anyway, we all know he was eventually sorted out by Holyfield (twice) and put back in his box for good by Lennox.

But living through the 90s it was deemed a giant mess at the time. But looking back now even heavyweights like Tua and late 90s heavyweights like the Klitschkos were coming through so add them to the mix of names I've previously mentioned and now its rightly deemed a talent rich era.

But we didn't know that at the time
Well, you've certainly taken Steve Bunce's crown of worst writer of boxing histories.

Tuan-JIm odds on for being under 30...

Posted: **03 Nov 2017, 10:02**

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: ↑02 Nov 2017, 17:48 Where I lived, the 90's was recognized as a great time for heavyweight boxing while it was going on and I knew evander would beat Mike when he was a cruiser. One thing I'll disagree with Lennox on is that Wilder is fully developed. He's just not skilled. He's like an athletic bonecrusher.

Where I live they are NOW recognised as a great time for heavyweight boxing, but at the time 80-90% of the joe-public thought the No1 heavyweight was banged up & the rest were battling it out for the No2 spot... And not very successfully I might add, as all the belts kept getting passed around.

Well done for recognising Evander would beat Tyson, I always thought Lewis would beat Tyson. But we were both in the minority to the general public's (expert) perception.

BoxRec

Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning

Re: Lennox Lewis: Joshua, Wilder Are Under-Developed, Still Learning