Lennox Lewis; Greatest Heavyweight of all time?

[Lunny]

Foreman thinks so, or at least thought so.

These aren't my thoughts, just arguments I've heard before. I'm interested in hearing everyone elses views.


He's beaten every man he's faced in a very strong era of heavyweight boxing, easilly the strongest since the 70s.

Tyson, Holyfield, Klitschko, Tua etc.

Retired at the top. One of only 2 men to beat Vitali.


EDIT: A few people are saying where they'd rank him. I'd be interested to see who's ahead/behind on your lists too. Cheers.


Any thoughts?

[mr. magoo]

Thoughts?

I think he belongs somewhere between #4-#7, but #1 is simply too high.

[McGrain]

Foreman is off his head.

"Ali is the greatest man to have ever boxed. Louis is the greatest Heavy...but Lewis would have beaten them all!"

Lewis has no case for the #1 spot, at all. He just didn't beat the named fighters that Muhammad Ali did. Nor did he fight the best of his era (not his fault, IMO), nor does he look as impressive on film.

I have Lewis at either #3 of #4 depending on how I am feeling about Liston, and I don't see how he can be justified at #1 or #2 on any kind of list.

[la-califa]

Any greatest of all time does not get knocked out in his prime by a journeyman fighter...Twice! No less!

[ryanm8655]

Not quite journeymen are they...

These things happen...it's boxing...bit harsh to judge his career on the 2 defeats...

[McGrain]

Not quite journeymen are they...

These things happen...it's boxing...bit harsh to judge his career on the 2 defeats...


Nobody - I don't think - is judging his career on his 2 defeats. If I was doing so it would be impossible to rank him at 3 or 4, which I do.

But can the #1 suffer such defeats? Yes.

During his prime? No.

[Lunny]

Any greatest of all time does not get knocked out in his prime by a journeyman fighter...Twice! No less!
Rahman and McCall aren't journeymen and he avenged those, his only defeats.

[GPater11093]

journeymen dont become world champs or contenders

[Lunny]

Nobody - I don't think - is judging his career on his 2 defeats. If I was doing so it would be impossible to rank him at 3 or 4, which I do.

But can the #1 suffer such defeats? Yes.

During his prime? No.You raise a good point. Ali only lost to Frazier and Norton during his prime. I suppose it was just a different class of fighter. Frazier and Norton are a class above McCall (!) and Rahman.

The only edge Lewis has over Ali is the fact he finished at the top.

[la-califa]

Nobody - I don't think - is judging his career on his 2 defeats. If I was doing so it would be impossible to rank him at 3 or 4, which I do.

But can the #1 suffer such defeats? Yes.

During his prime? No.
Yes, When Lewis was on, he was a great fighter. He beat alot of the best of his Era. But how can anyone rate him over fighters like Marciano? Who never lost a bout. Louis- 26 title defenses. Ali- Never had been stopped (& faced some boxing greats).Holmes-undefeated until deep into his career.
Lennox Lewis was very good, but not #1.

[McGrain]

Yes, When Lewis was on, he was a great fighter. He beat alot of the best of his Era. But how can anyone rate him over fighters like Marciano?

Head to head, Marciano isn't going to rate that highly weighing in at 180lbs. His level of competition is good, but arguably not as good as Lewis's.

I have Marciano at 10, i'm comfortable with that.

[Holmes' Jab]

Anywhere between 3rd and 6th is fine with me (I have him 4th). Louis and Ali are locks for the top two spots obviously. Holmes is 3rd in my opinion.

[rydersonthestorm]

You raise a good point. Ali only lost to Frazier and Norton during his prime. I suppose it was just a different class of fighter. Frazier and Norton are a class above McCall (!) and Rahman.

The only edge Lewis has over Ali is the fact he finished at the top.
I think norton is overated i honestly think he would struggle to beat mccall.

[mr. magoo]

My list changes on an almost weekly basis, but today it looks something like this:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Lewis
5. Tyson
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8. Holyfield
9. Liston
10. Charles
11. Patterson
12. Bowe

Or something to that effect.. Next week of course, I may not have the same list.

[McGrain]

01 - Muhammad Ali
02 - Joe Louis
03 - Lennox Lewis
04 - Sonny Listn
05 - Joe Frazier
06 - Jack Johnson
07 - Mike Tyson
08 - Larry Holmes
09 - Rocky Marciano
10 - Harry Wills
11 - Jim Jeffries
12 - George Foreman
13 - Evander Holyfield
14 - Jack Dempsey
15 - Max Schmeling
16 - Joe Walcott
17 - Floyd Patterson
18 - Ezzard Charles
19 - Wlad Klistschko
20 - Peter Jackson
21 - Riddick Bowe
22 - Sam Langford
23 - Ken Norton
24 - Gene Tunney
25 - Max Baer
26 - Vitali Klitschko
27 - Bob Fitzsimmons
28 - James J Corbett
29 - Joe Jeannette
30 - Sam McVey

[la-califa]

My list changes on an almost weekly basis, but today it looks something like this:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Lewis
5. Tyson
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8. Holyfield
9. Liston
10. Charles
11. Patterson
12. Bowe

Or something to that effect.. Next week of course, I may not have the same list. Larry Holmes, Gene Tunney or Jack Johnson don't cut the Mustard?

[Jennifer Love Hewitt]

Lewis is the No 1 greatest heavyweight in my opinion.

[mr. magoo]

Larry Holmes, Gene Tunney or Jack Johnson don't cut the Mustard?


Oh shit, that's who I forgot LOL:lol:

I was wondering why I was scratching my head so long and why the list was taking forever to fill up......

Here's the revision

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Holmes
5. Lewis
6. Tyson
7. Foreman
8. Frazier
9. Holyfield
10. Liston
11. Charles
12. Patterson
13. Bowe
14. Johnoson
15 Jeffries

[McGrain]

Johnson below Patterson?

[mr. magoo]

Johnson below Patterson?


Next week Johnson could be on top.. Sort of like alternating positions between you and your significant other. Know what I mean?

[BoxingFanNo1]

He's top 5.
Louis and Ali occupy the top 2, that's a given.

[MrMarvel]

It wasn't that great of an era. Lewis is nowhere near the best. Foreman sells himself short. A prime Foreman would have knocked him out. Holmes would have outboxed him. I don't know where to put him, but certainly not in the top half of the best heavyweights.

[SuzieQ49]

My list changes on an almost weekly basis, but today it looks something like this:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Lewis
5. Tyson
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8. Holyfield
9. Liston
10. Charles
11. Patterson
12. Bowe


We have different opinions on walcott, but i think walcott rates over charles and patterson. walcott beat better heavyweight competition than both, cleaned out his era better, and head to head at his best he rates over both of them against the rest of the heavyweight field IMO.


I dont see how charles can be top 10. Instead of defending his title against young hungry bombers like bob baker, rocky marciano, clarence henry, rex layne, roland lastarza......he instead chose to give shots to 5 very undeserving fighters who were either washed up/or mediocre in the first place.

[McGrain]

I agree, Walcott rates above Charles and Patterson - but the truth is, there is so little in it, it doesn't really matter.

[Holmes' Jab]

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Lewis
5. Liston
6. Johnson
7. Marciano
8. Frazier
9. Tyson
10. Holyfield


The main movers Liston (up a place) and Johnson (was 9th at one stage). Marciano down two place, legacy-wise I have to have him mid way down the list, but Liston and Johnson surpass him as a fighter. I'm pretty much content with this latest tweak to the order.

[Bokaj]

If someone thinks Lewis would beat Ali and Louis, I can live with that. But he just wasn't as dominant as they were and he has worse defeats, so I don't see how he can rank alongside, let alone above, them.

Would a somewhat green and a bit unproven Lewis beat Liston? Probably not. Would he dominate an era containing Frazier, Foreman, Quarry, Shavers, Lyle and Young after losing his best 3,5 years and gradually getting old? Probably not. Would he rack up 25 consecutive defenses? I think we have enough to answer a firm NO there.

[Holmes' Jab]

Johnson below Patterson?


Floyd was an underappreciated fighter/champ and top guy by all accounts, but yeah Johnson below him on any list is madness. :nut

[Holmes' Jab]

... 11-20:

11. Harry Wills
12. Jim Jeffries
13. George Foreman
14. Jack Dempsey
15. Riddick Bowe
16. Joe Walcott
17. Max Schmeling
18. Peter Jackson
19. Gene Tunney
20. Floyd Patterson

[Holmes' Jab]

I think norton is overated i honestly think he would struggle to beat mccall.


Oops. :-(

[jowcol]

It wasn't that great of an era. Lewis is nowhere near the best. Foreman sells himself short. A prime Foreman would have knocked him out. Holmes would have outboxed him. I don't know where to put him, but certainly not in the top half of the best heavyweights.
Agree totally. Prime George? Lights out Lennox. Holmes outboxes him.
And yes, those two prime KO's DO hurt his legacy.
I see a handful of other champs being bad matchups for him.

I may be stretching a tad but I see a few 70's boys causing him trouble.
Norton? Lennox may have taken him out at some point but that big Norton overhand right may have found its mark.
If Quarry didn't cut (perhaps a big if) I can see him stealing a lot of rounds with his counterpunching.

Best case Lewis? A big, strong boxer that could bang and be top drawer in ANY era. And does deserve an ATG ranking somewhere.

My $0.02

[Holmes' Jab]

Lewis outboxes Foreman and stops him late. He loses a narrow decision to Holmes. He'd knock Norton out.

[round15]

Foreman is off his head.

"Ali is the greatest man to have ever boxed. Louis is the greatest Heavy...but Lewis would have beaten them all!"

Lewis has no case for the #1 spot, at all. He just didn't beat the named fighters that Muhammad Ali did. Nor did he fight the best of his era (not his fault, IMO), nor does he look as impressive on film.

I have Lewis at either #3 of #4 depending on how I am feeling about Liston, and I don't see how he can be justified at #1 or #2 on any kind of list.

I've also heard Foreman say that Lewis is the greatest, and I don't agree as well. I do believe Lennox Lewis right now is the greatest of the heavyweight big men in the history of the sport. He's certainly way ahead of Willard, Baer and Carnera.

[McGrain]

Lewis is the #1 super-heavy, that's fair to say.

[MaliSlamusrex]

1. Joe Louis - Joe Louis was a natural instinctive boxer.
2. Lennox Lewis - Lewis was an intelligent boxer who studies the sport and found the best style to dominate the division
3. Muhammad Ali - a flair boxer who developed styles and set trends, but at times he was sloppy.

But to be honest i wouldn't mind changing the top 3 i change my mind very often who is no 1-3 but this is my top 3.

[PowerPuncher]

You can make a good case for Lewis being no1 Hw of all time, especially H2H where he benefits from nutrition, supplements, fight videos, modern training

If we go off resume/achievement alone, there is still a case:

1. Took on the biggest/strongest set of contenders in history - this is unarguable
2. Took on the biggest punchers in HW history - Tyson, Tua, McCall, Klitschko, Rudduck, Morrison, Bruno
3. Beat the next top HW in Klitschko at 37
4. Beat every man he faced
5. Beat top5 rated fighters year on year from '91-03
6. Greats like Holyfield and Tyson, aged or not, no one else beat both these men
7. 1 of the most avoided HWs in history, ducked by Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Moorer and Foreman
8. Reclaimed the HW title past his prime
9. Following wins put in context:

Mason when he was top5 and undefeated
Rudduck when he was top3
Bruno when he was top5
Mercer when he was top10
Morrison when he was top10
McCall redemption
Akiwande when he was WBO belt holder
Golota when he was considered no1 after retiring Bowe
Briggs when he was
Holyfield when he was considered no1
Grant when he was considered the new mesiah
Tua when he was top5 and considered the new Tyson
Tyson when he was top3
Vitali when he was top2 and prime

[Lunny]

You can make a good case for Lewis being no1 Hw of all time, especially H2H where he benefits from nutrition, supplements, fight videos, modern training

If we go off resume/achievement alone, there is still a case:

1. Took on the biggest/strongest set of contenders in history - this is unarguable
2. Took on the biggest punchers in HW history - Tyson, Tua, McCall, Klitschko, Rudduck, Morrison, Bruno
3. Beat the next top HW in Klitschko at 37
4. Beat every man he faced
5. Beat top5 rated fighters year on year from '91-03
6. Greats like Holyfield and Tyson, aged or not, no one else beat both these men
7. 1 of the most avoided HWs in history, ducked by Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Moorer and Foreman
8. Reclaimed the HW title past his prime
9. Following wins put in context:

Mason when he was top5 and undefeated
Rudduck when he was top3
Bruno when he was top5
Mercer when he was top10
Morrison when he was top10
McCall redemption
Akiwande when he was WBO belt holder
Golota when he was considered no1 after retiring Bowe
Briggs when he was
Holyfield when he was considered no1
Grant when he was considered the new mesiah
Tua when he was top5 and considered the new Tyson
Tyson when he was top3
Vitali when he was top2 and prime
That's far better than the remnants of an argument I put in the OP! Cheers.

For me the number 1 is Ali still but all those facts you put forward really make you think.

[McGrain]

You can make a good case for Lewis being no1 Hw of all time, especially H2H where he benefits from nutrition, supplements, fight videos, modern training

If we go off resume/achievement alone, there is still a case:

1. Took on the biggest/strongest set of contenders in history - this is unarguable
2. Took on the biggest punchers in HW history - Tyson, Tua, McCall, Klitschko, Rudduck, Morrison, Bruno
3. Beat the next top HW in Klitschko at 37
4. Beat every man he faced
5. Beat top5 rated fighters year on year from '91-03
6. Greats like Holyfield and Tyson, aged or not, no one else beat both these men
7. 1 of the most avoided HWs in history, ducked by Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Moorer and Foreman
8. Reclaimed the HW title past his prime
9. Following wins put in context:

Mason when he was top5 and undefeated
Rudduck when he was top3
Bruno when he was top5
Mercer when he was top10
Morrison when he was top10
McCall redemption
Akiwande when he was WBO belt holder
Golota when he was considered no1 after retiring Bowe
Briggs when he was
Holyfield when he was considered no1
Grant when he was considered the new mesiah
Tua when he was top5 and considered the new Tyson
Tyson when he was top3
Vitali when he was top2 and prime


This is basically a list of the things that Lewis did good. That's fair enough. But do you accept that a similair list based upon Muhammad Ali's acheivments would be better? Or not? Because this is not that comparative, aside from areas where Lewis excells.

"You could make the case for Lewis being #1, especially head to head."

What? In spite of the fact that he got beaten by two HW's that probably don't make the top 200 head to head in his prime? How about the fact that he looks like he'll go if you get him on the chin?

[Bokaj]

You can make a good case for Lewis being no1 Hw of all time, especially H2H where he benefits from nutrition, supplements, fight videos, modern training

If we go off resume/achievement alone, there is still a case:

1. Took on the biggest/strongest set of contenders in history - this is unarguable
2. Took on the biggest punchers in HW history - Tyson, Tua, McCall, Klitschko, Rudduck, Morrison, Bruno
3. Beat the next top HW in Klitschko at 37
4. Beat every man he faced
5. Beat top5 rated fighters year on year from '91-03
6. Greats like Holyfield and Tyson, aged or not, no one else beat both these men
7. 1 of the most avoided HWs in history, ducked by Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Moorer and Foreman
8. Reclaimed the HW title past his prime
9. Following wins put in context:

Mason when he was top5 and undefeated
Rudduck when he was top3
Bruno when he was top5
Mercer when he was top10
Morrison when he was top10
McCall redemption
Akiwande when he was WBO belt holder
Golota when he was considered no1 after retiring Bowe
Briggs when he was
Holyfield when he was considered no1
Grant when he was considered the new mesiah
Tua when he was top5 and considered the new Tyson
Tyson when he was top3
Vitali when he was top2 and prime

Impressive achievements, no doubt, but it still isn't in the league of Ali and Louis.

Your'e right that he was in the era of the strongest and most powerful HWs, but I wouldn't make to much out of this since Lewis had access to the same nutrition, supplements and training methods that made the fighters in that era so big and strong. And you could spin it differently and say that the HWs in his era had the worst stamina and workrate of any era. They were also comparatively slow in general.

[la-califa]

You can make a good case for Lewis being no1 Hw of all time, especially H2H where he benefits from nutrition, supplements, fight videos, modern training

If we go off resume/achievement alone, there is still a case:

1. Took on the biggest/strongest set of contenders in history - this is unarguable
2. Took on the biggest punchers in HW history - Tyson, Tua, McCall, Klitschko, Rudduck, Morrison, Bruno
3. Beat the next top HW in Klitschko at 37
4. Beat every man he faced
5. Beat top5 rated fighters year on year from '91-03
6. Greats like Holyfield and Tyson, aged or not, no one else beat both these men
7. 1 of the most avoided HWs in history, ducked by Bowe, Tyson, Holyfield, Moorer and Foreman
8. Reclaimed the HW title past his prime
9. Following wins put in context:

Mason when he was top5 and undefeated
Rudduck when he was top3
Bruno when he was top5
Mercer when he was top10
Morrison when he was top10
McCall redemption
Akiwande when he was WBO belt holder
Golota when he was considered no1 after retiring Bowe
Briggs when he was
Holyfield when he was considered no1
Grant when he was considered the new mesiah
Tua when he was top5 and considered the new Tyson
Tyson when he was top3
Vitali when he was top2 and primeThe biggest, strongest Heavyweight fighters were clearly in the Seventies. Earnie Shavers, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, Ron Lyle,Oscar Bonavena,George Chuvalo. Ali faced them all & was not stopped once.

[PowerPuncher]

That's far better than the remnants of an argument I put in the OP! Cheers.

For me the number 1 is Ali still but all those facts you put forward really make you think.

I have Ali as 1, I just think a strong case can be made for Lenny

[PowerPuncher]

The biggest, strongest Heavyweight fighters were clearly in the Seventies. Earnie Shavers, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, Ron Lyle,Oscar Bonavena,George Chuvalo. Ali faced them all & was not stopped once.

These fighters were nowhere near the size and strength of Vitali, Grant, Rudduck, Golota, Bruno

Ali and Lennox both fought massive punchers ofcourse

[PowerPuncher]

This is basically a list of the things that Lewis did good. That's fair enough. But do you accept that a similair list based upon Muhammad Ali's acheivments would be better? Or not? Because this is not that comparative, aside from areas where Lewis excells.

"You could make the case for Lewis being #1, especially head to head."

What? In spite of the fact that he got beaten by two HW's that probably don't make the top 200 head to head in his prime? How about the fact that he looks like he'll go if you get him on the chin?

Yes I think only Ali tops this reign personally though, perhaps Joe Louis

Lennox got beaten when he let his guard down and wasn't focused, the rematches proved that. The Rahman loss was AT ALTITUDE past his prime - ever been to high altitude? Its hard enough going for a jog let alone fighting. Lennox flew in at the last miniute, Rahman prepared at altitude for months. The McCall loss was pre technical prime at the hands of a don King ref and 1 of the biggest punchers in HW history (YES!!!), and Lewis may have survived but he took McCall for granted anyway and the rest of his career shows that

In terms of Rahman/McCall not being top200 H2H, I'd say that underrates them both, history will remember them more fondly

So all that aside, H2H Lenny stacks up well, firstly he's obviously the biggest strongest great, he has 1 of the best jabs, he is 1 of the most athletic, hes 1 of the biggest punchers, and hes 1 of the best technically

[McGrain]

Yes I think only Ali tops this reign personally though, perhaps Joe Louis

I there are plenty of fighters that have a case for being ranked ahead of Lewis, especially if we don't ignore those two losses, but I have no problem with this statement, generally ranking Lewis at 3 or 4.

Lennox got beaten when he let his guard down and wasn't focused, the rematches proved that.

I'm sick of hearing this, even if it is partly true. Why isn't focus, intensity, attitude a part of ranking a fighter? These are some of the most important attributes in boxing!! And in spite of what Lewis die-hards think (and I know because I am close to being one), avenging embarrassing defeats is not the same as erasing them.

The Rahman loss was AT ALTITUDE past his prime

My pick for Lewis's single best performance in the ring is Rahman II. I do not accept for one second that Lewis was past his boxing prime when he lost to Rahman.

As a counter-argument, I do believe Lewis should recieve more credit than he generally does for his longevity.

So all that aside, H2H Lenny stacks up well, firstly he's obviously the biggest strongest great, he has 1 of the best jabs, he is 1 of the most athletic, hes 1 of the biggest punchers, and hes 1 of the best technically

Agree with all of this but still

A - He got beaten by two fighters who are not inside the top 200 head to head whilst in his prime

B - He looks like if you clock him on his chin he will go.

Nah, I don't think he has the case for #1 head to head, though his skillset and his considerable (and sustained) head to head ability do contribute to his overall ranking.

[PowerPuncher]

1. I there are plenty of fighters that have a case for being ranked ahead of Lewis, especially if we don't ignore those two losses, but I have no problem with this statement, generally ranking Lewis at 3 or 4.

2. I'm sick of hearing this, even if it is partly true. Why isn't focus, intensity, attitude a part of ranking a fighter? These are some of the most important attributes in boxing!! And in spite of what Lewis die-hards think (and I know because I am close to being one), avenging embarrassing defeats is not the same as erasing them.

3. My pick for Lewis's single best performance in the ring is Rahman II. I do not accept for one second that Lewis was past his boxing prime when he lost to Rahman.

4. As a counter-argument, I do believe Lewis should recieve more credit than he generally does for his longevity.

Agree with all of this but still

A - He got beaten by two fighters who are not inside the top 200 head to head whilst in his prime

B - He looks like if you clock him on his chin he will go.

5. Nah, I don't think he has the case for #1 head to head, though his skillset and his considerable (and sustained) head to head ability do contribute to his overall ranking.

1. In terms of length of dominance against the best at the top and proving themself best in the era? Perhaps Johnson too but his title reign was weak, Holmes opposition was weak, the rest weren't fighting enough of the top men or proving themselves the best for long enough

2. OK but What about Louis's contentious decisions? What about Ali's losses to Frazier and Norton, that some may argue weren't truly elite? What about Ali's arguable gifts? Dempsey's losses, Holmes disputable wins and his destruction against Tyson. Every champ has their indiscretions and poorer performances

3. He was past his physical prime and the altitude clearly did him in, he may aswell have been 50

4. A. McCall beat 5champions and 2 ATG top10ers, was he that bad? He's 2-1 against ATGs, better than Frazier :D
B. Lennox Lewis had an iron chin :D :
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

5. We'll never know about the H2H, I rate him highly and prime for prime few stand a chance

[Russell]

His final fight is actually becoming more impressive with time as Vitali's comeback continues.

[McGrain]

1. In terms of length of dominance against the best at the top and proving themself best in the era?

No. In terms of who should be ranked most highly.


2. OK but What about Louis's contentious decisions? What about Ali's losses to Frazier and Norton, that some may argue weren't truly elite? What about Ali's arguable gifts? Dempsey's losses, Holmes disputable wins and his destruction against Tyson. Every champ has their indiscretions and poorer performances

Of course, but...nothing comparable to the embarrasment that Lewis suffered. Just the way it is.

3. He was past his physical prime and the altitude clearly did him in, he may aswell have been 50

Physical prime and boxing prime are different. I don't think Lewis the proffestional fighter ever looked better than Rahman II, and that, at the very least, is a reasonable point of view.

If a fighter is so lacking in boxing intelligence and intensity that he turns up to train in altitude a number of weeks AFTER the hungry contender weiting for him, he deserves to lose more credit, not gain some sort of reprive.

B. Lennox Lewis had an iron chin :D :
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

I've seen the video, i've seen the KO's, I know as well as you do that Lewis did not have an iron chin.

5. We'll never know about the H2H, I rate him highly and prime for prime few stand a chance

I rate him highly, there are plenty that stand a chance though. That's just the way it is. In a division that looked like this:

Ch: Ali
01: Louis
02: Liston
03: Lewis
04: Tyson
05: Bowe
06: Foreman
07: Holmes
08: Frazier
09: Holyfield
10: Jack Dempsey

Lewis is losing plenty of times, same as everybody else. Also, I never leave the house :lol:

[la-califa]

True greatness is having the ability to come back from adversity. The Shot that ALi took at the end of FOTC. Would Lewis have been able to rise & finish on his feet?

Holmes suffered a tremendous shot against Shavers. Could Lewis recover & still earn the victory?
Perhaps he very well could have. Hard to say.
If Lewis were knocked out by a prime Tyson, then avenged that with an impressive victory. Then his stock would indeed be alot higher.
Other ATG Heavyweight, which were stopped in thier or close to thier prime's were by other ATG's. Frazier(Foreman) Holyfield(Bowe) Norton (Foreman). Holmes(Tyson).
I still can't explain why Lewis was stopped by these two fighters, but it did hurt his stock.

[janitor]

Foreman thinks so, or at least thought so.

These aren't my thoughts, just arguments I've heard before. I'm interested in hearing everyone elses views.


He's beaten every man he's faced in a very strong era of heavyweight boxing, easilly the strongest since the 70s.

Tyson, Holyfield, Klitschko, Tua etc.

Retired at the top. One of only 2 men to beat Vitali.


EDIT: A few people are saying where they'd rank him. I'd be interested to see who's ahead/behind on your lists too. Cheers.


Any thoughts?

My thoughts.

I am certain that Joe Louis and Muhamad Ali should ocupy the top two slots in whatever order you prefer (based on resume).

They both beat twice as many curently ranked contenders as anybody else and had twice as many title defences.

The battle for No3 slot is wide open with seven or so candidates and Lewis has a strong claim.

[McGrain]

True greatness is having the ability to come back from adversity. The Shot that ALi took at the end of FOTC. Would Lewis have been able to rise & finish on his feet?

Holmes suffered a tremendous shot against Shavers. Could Lewis recover & still earn the victory?
Perhaps he very well could have. Hard to say.
If Lewis were knocked out by a prime Tyson, then avenged that with an impressive victory. Then his stock would indeed be alot higher.
Other ATG Heavyweight, which were stopped in thier or close to thier prime's were by other ATG's. Frazier(Foreman) Holyfield(Bowe) Norton (Foreman). Holmes(Tyson).
I still can't explain why Lewis was stopped by these two fighters, but it did hurt his stock.


One thing about the McCall stoppage - many of the fighters we are comparing him to, Louis, Ali, Liston, Baer, whoever, would have been afforded the chance to continue in that bout.

[la-califa]

It's a shame Riddick Bowe or a Prime Tyson didn't fight Lewis. Then there would be little speculation as to Lewis' standing.

[AnthonyJ74]

Yes, When Lewis was on, he was a great fighter. He beat alot of the best of his Era. But how can anyone rate him over fighters like Marciano? Who never lost a bout. Louis- 26 title defenses. Ali- Never had been stopped (& faced some boxing greats).Holmes-undefeated until deep into his career.
Lennox Lewis was very good, but not #1.

I think Lennox Lewis should be rated higher than Larry Holmes based strictly on the superiority of Lennox Lewis' opposition. Holmes reigned longer and had more defenses, but Lewis fought all the deserving fighters during his reign(or at least tried to) and regained the title.

[FromWithin]

Oh shit, that's who I forgot LOL:lol:

I was wondering why I was scratching my head so long and why the list was taking forever to fill up......

Here's the revision

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Holmes
5. Lewis
6. Tyson
7. Foreman
8. Frazier
9. Holyfield
10. Liston
11. Charles
12. Patterson
13. Bowe
14. Johnoson
15 Jeffries

Tyson before Holyfield?

[Maxmomer]

Ali and Louis are locks for the top 2 spot. Anyone that doesn't have them at one and two are just wrong. Plain fucking wrong. Lewis has a legitimate claim for the No. 3 spot, he's in my top 5.

[PowerPuncher]

It's a shame Riddick Bowe or a Prime Tyson didn't fight Lewis. Then there would be little speculation as to Lewis' standing.

Bowe did and got his ass kicked, then ran from the rematch earning him the name Chicken Bowe. Tyson was younger than Lennox when Lennox dominated and sparked him, but Tyson was more faded

[PowerPuncher]

1. No. In terms of who should be ranked most highly.

2. Of course, but...nothing comparable to the embarrasment that Lewis suffered. Just the way it is.

3. Physical prime and boxing prime are different. I don't think Lewis the proffestional fighter ever looked better than Rahman II, and that, at the very least, is a reasonable point of view.

4. If a fighter is so lacking in boxing intelligence and intensity that he turns up to train in altitude a number of weeks AFTER the hungry contender weiting for him, he deserves to lose more credit, not gain some sort of reprive.

5. I've seen the video, i've seen the KO's, I know as well as you do that Lewis did not have an iron chin.

6. I rate him highly, there are plenty that stand a chance though. That's just the way it is. In a division that looked like this:

Ch: Ali
01: Louis
02: Liston
03: Lewis
04: Tyson
05: Bowe
06: Foreman
07: Holmes
08: Frazier
09: Holyfield
10: Jack Dempsey

Lewis is losing plenty of times, same as everybody else. Also, I never leave the house :lol:

1. What do you base your rankings on, I think Lewis is top3 on opposition, dominance and length of reign at the top

2. Agreed, these things happen and at least Lenny left on top beating every man he faced. And how many have beat the next big champ?

3. Agreed and many ignore than, imo Lennox physical prime was around 92-93 and technical around 97 onwards

4. Boxers are only human and plenty have off nights because of it, Lennox didnt have many off nights though

5. Iron perhaps not but its pretty damn solid, he was only clocked when he left his chin out to dry and if Chuvalo left his chin out to dry he'd be ko'd too

6. Is that your top10 list? Wheres Rocky/Wills/Johnson? I'll make the following comments on those match ups:

Louis - outboxed and floored on many occasions, never faced a boxer puncher like Lewis, vastly outmuscled.

Liston - too slow, smaller, I think he gets picked off

Tyson - a toss up

Bowe - beat him once and made him run from a
rematch

Foreman - struggled against boxers, nearly ko'd by Lyle, Lennox lands first and Foreman is equally liable to being ko'd based on the Lyle fight

Holmes - Holmes is the better boxer, Lennox the better puncher, and also bigger and stronger

Frazier - Frazier is there to be hit, Lennox probably does something similar to Foreman

Holyfield - beat him, while Holy was past prime Lennox probably was too and there's only 3years seperating them in age, does a younger weaker Holyfield do better?

Jack Dempsey - Too small and not as technically sound, caught by Firpo, could be wreckless and this would get him ko'd. Dempsey too has been ko'd by journeymen. Would punches from a 190lb man even bother Lennox? Schooled by Tunney, Dempsey has little chance

I say at most he loses 3 of those, Ali beats him too

Now maybe in modern times those fighters benefit from modern training/supplements/nutrition to add some muscle/speed to the equation. Head 2 heads arent always fair in that respect

[McGrain]

1. What do you base your rankings on, I think Lewis is top3 on opposition, dominance and length of reign at the top

I add skillset, intagibles (stuff like longevity, relative primes of himself and opponents, attitude to taking on the best etc.). I think top 3 is fine based upon your criteria - but i mean #3.

5. Iron perhaps not but its pretty damn solid, he was only clocked when he left his chin out to dry and if Chuvalo left his chin out to dry he'd be ko'd too

I consider him vulnerable against punchers.

6. Is that your top10 list? Wheres Rocky/Wills/Johnson?

No, just ten fighters, you can check out my list on the bottom of page one of this thread, all those guys make the ten.

[Duodenum]

How would Lennox have done over 15 rounds?

An old Holmes was better against Mercer and better after one bout against McCall than Lewis had been. (But yes, Lewis should have been allowed to continue against McCall.) His clean knockout loss to Rahman is devastating to any claim that he could be number one. Ali, Louis, Holmes, Frazier, Marciano, Foreman and Dempsey never succumbed to a single shot like that. (Dempsey-Flynn I was a staged, predetermined outcome.)

Lewis would have lost had he taken the knockdown punches Holmes recovered from against Shavers and Snipes (especially the surprise from Snipes). Holmes would have gotten up to defeat Rahman, and of course he nearly did upset McCall.

Riddickulous deprived us of Bowe-Lewis, which could have settled a great deal of speculation concerning the historical standings of both.

I give Lewis credit for not ducking anybody, and trying to establish his place in history as best he could, but the lapses against Rahman and McCall which Holmes and Louis avoided for so long knock Lennox down a notch.

My top three are Holmes, pre-exile Ali and Toledo Dempsey. Louis and FOTC Frazier come next, then Johnson, Marciano, Jeffries, Liston and Foreman. The successful comebacks of Foreman against Moorer and Holmes against Mercer are, of course, extraordinary in heavyweight annals.

[NickHudson]

Bowe did and got his ass kicked, then ran from the rematch earning him the name Chicken Bowe. Tyson was younger than Lennox when Lennox dominated and sparked him, but Tyson was more faded

I think personal career trajectory needs to factor a lot more in your analysis.

When Tyson faced Lewis in 2002 he was arguably 15 years past his best year as a professional boxer (1987).

When Holyfield faced Lewis in 1999 he was 8-10 years past his best year as a professional boxer. In fact, if you attach importance to the Qawi war at cruiser - one of his most accomplished performance - you could argue he was up to 13 years past his best year as a pro.

I don't know when Lewis' best year as a pro is, but from what I have read here it could have been 2002 (Rahman rematch) or maybe a wee bit earlier, say 1999 for the 2 Holyfield matches.

Either way, the dates of the fights with Holyfield and Tyson hugely favoured Lewis, and no amount of talk about their ages changes that fact.

No doubt Lewis' longevity is tremendous. Dramatic wins in '92 over Ruddock and Rahman in '01 is almost a 10 year span.

However, had he had multiple fights with Holyfield, Tyson and Bowe in the late eighties, early nineties, plus rematches with Mercer, plus got up against McCall and Rahman and then suffered sustained beatings, plus fought alternative to Fortune and Butler in '95 when at the peak of his physical powers - you can be sure he wouldnt have been quite so well preserved come 2000...

[PowerPuncher]

1. I think personal career trajectory needs to factor a lot more in your analysis.

2. When Tyson faced Lewis in 2002 he was arguably 15 years past his best year as a professional boxer (1987).

3. When Holyfield faced Lewis in 1999 he was 8-10 years past his best year as a professional boxer. In fact, if you attach importance to the Qawi war at cruiser - one of his most accomplished performance - you could argue he was up to 13 years past his best year as a pro.

4. I don't know when Lewis' best year as a pro is, but from what I have read here it could have been 2002 (Rahman rematch) or maybe a wee bit earlier, say 1999 for the 2 Holyfield matches.

5. Either way, the dates of the fights with Holyfield and Tyson hugely favoured Lewis, and no amount of talk about their ages changes that fact.

No doubt Lewis' longevity is tremendous. Dramatic wins in '92 over Ruddock and Rahman in '01 is almost a 10 year span.

6. However, had he had multiple fights with Holyfield, Tyson and Bowe in the late eighties, early nineties, plus rematches with Mercer, plus got up against McCall and Rahman and then suffered sustained beatings, plus fought alternative to Fortune and Butler in '95 when at the peak of his physical powers - you can be sure he wouldnt have been quite so well preserved come 2000...

1. OK prime is needed BUT we can tell allot even from performances post-prime, prime is often used as an excuse
2. Most would say 1988 is Tyson's peak but how far did he really fall from that level and how much is the competition being tougher? By 2002 he was way past it, but maybe Lennox was 35-36 by then too, that isn't prime physically
3. This is wrong, Holyfield was not prime at 186lbs in any way, he used weights/steroids to add 30lbs of muscle because it would make him a bigger/stronger more competitive HW. His peak speed/stamina was around 1990-1992, but his peak strength/power came in around 1996, which he needed as he was just too weak against Bowe. So upto 1996 Holyfield was showing improvements while declining in other areas and arguably his best performance was in 1996

4. Physically Lewis was prime 1992-1993, when Bowe ducked him, technically he'd improve later, just as Holyfield technically improved his game post-Bowe and post-Moorer. As I said in 1999 against Holyfield Lewis was not as physically near prime as 1992-3

5.Lewis wanted Holyfield from 1992-1999, Holyfield chose when he wanted to fight Lewis. Lewis wanted Tyson 1996 onwards. Both ducked him. Saying Lennox won when it suited him is disingenous and unfair, Lennox could have faded into obscurity too at the ages of 33 and 35. The only reason Lennox is seen as prime and the others are past it is because Lennox won and the other man lost

6. Possibly but he did arguably face tough opposition year on year, he just didn't suffer much damage along the way. After all Golota ruined Bowe in 2fights and didn't last a round with Lennox. Rudduck gave Tyson 2 grueling fights and lasted 2 rounds with Lennox. Lennox also fought bigger punchers than both Holyfield and Bowe

[ChrisPontius]

Ali, Louis, Holmes, Frazier, Marciano, Foreman and Dempsey never succumbed to a single shot like that. (Dempsey-Flynn I was a staged, predetermined outcome.)


It's true that Louis, Foreman, Marciano, Frazier, Holmes and Ali never succumbed to a single shot like that. But then again, Lewis never got thoroughly outboxed and humiliated by someone who literally did nothing but take punches (Foreman-Ali), or completely outboxed (Foreman-Young), Foreman-Frazier is nothing more flattering than Lewis-McCall, Holmes may well have 8th and 9th round TKO losses to Snipes and Shavers (both lesser fighters than McCall) if the same referee of the McCall fight was there, and Lewis was never knocked out by a weak chinned former light heavyweight in Schmeling... or how about losing 19 out of 20 rounds to a former lightheavyweight named Tunney?

And Dempsey-Flynn, a predetermined outcome? :lol: Why, because 6 years afterwards, when Dempsey became a superstar, people tried to rewrite history that it was a fix, while primary reports say no such thing? And this was in a time of many fixes, when even some clean bouts got booed as fix. And did you ever see Lewis lose multiple times against a Meehan, or get knocked down 9 times by a journeyman middleweight?




Lewis would have lost had he taken the knockdown punches Holmes recovered from against Shavers and Snipes (especially the surprise from Snipes). Holmes would have gotten up to defeat Rahman, and of course he nearly did upset McCall.


As said above: i'd argue the above: Holmes was in just as bad state against Snipes and Shavers as Lewis was against McCall, but Holmes was not stopped on his feet... and rightfully so.


My top three are Holmes, pre-exile Ali and Toledo Dempsey. Louis and FOTC Frazier come next, then Johnson, Marciano, Jeffries, Liston and Foreman. The successful comebacks of Foreman against Moorer and Holmes against Mercer are, of course, extraordinary in heavyweight annals.

You must rate very high on head to head ability (for which i CAN see a case for Lewis #1), because on resume, Dempsey has no business at #3.

[Flea Man]

h2h....Possibly.

In terms of resume AND talent....no, Ali or Joe Louis IMO.

I have Lennox at no.5 at the moment.

[Duodenum]

Dempsey-Flynn, a predetermined outcome? :lol: Why, because 6 years afterwards, when Dempsey became a superstar, people tried to rewrite history that it was a fix, while primary reports say no such thing?Legally binding courtroom testimony under oath was taken to this effect during Jack's draft evasion trial in 1920, that $500 was accepted by Dempsey's camp to lose to Flynn. Dempsey's former wife Maxine testified to this. (Dempsey himself always referred to this as "the Flynn affair.")Holmes was in just as bad state against Snipes and Shavers as Lewis was against McCall, but Holmes was not stopped on his feet... and rightfully so.My admittedly subjective belief is that Lennox would have been down for the count in those situations, as he was against Rahman.You must rate very high on head to head ability (for which i CAN see a case for Lewis #1), because on resume, Dempsey has no business at #3.In the specific cases of Toledo Dempsey and FOTC Frazier, this is indeed true. That Dempsey also dominated Tommy Gibbons over a full 15 rounds is critical in my esteem. Of course Lennox never had the opportunity to demonstrate he could do this. (I also believe that the Louis of the Godoy rematch probably would have ripped apart any version of Marciano.)

Good to see you, by the way.

[mr. magoo]

We have different opinions on walcott, but i think walcott rates over charles and patterson. walcott beat better heavyweight competition than both, cleaned out his era better, and head to head at his best he rates over both of them against the rest of the heavyweight field IMO.


I dont see how charles can be top 10. Instead of defending his title against young hungry bombers like bob baker, rocky marciano, clarence henry, rex layne, roland lastarza......he instead chose to give shots to 5 very undeserving fighters who were either washed up/or mediocre in the first place.


To be honest, I have a hell of a time rating fighters. The heavyweight list is a difficult one. Sometimes I have guys sharing the same spots. One poster named Marciano-Frazier wrote some pretty good stuff on Ezzard Charles one day that persuaded me to think that he was top 10. I don't have anything against Walcott but I have developed a real appreciation for Ezzard Charles in recent months.

[mr. magoo]

I do have to agree with some that in a head to head sense, Lewis may very well be the best fighter of all time, regardless of the two ugly losses. We have to remember that he improved significantly after the McCall defeat of '94 upon working with Manny Steward. And the Rahman loss didn't happen until 2001 when Lennox was near 36 or something. If we study the 7 year time frame inbetween, he was really dismantling some powerful heavyweights who were looking rather menacing.. I never would have picked him ( or anyone else ), to dust Andrew Golata in a single round the way that he did. Especially after what Golata had just done to Bowe. Michael Grant was a giant among heavyweights and coming off a very respectable streak of quality wins.. Look at what happened to him when stepped in the ring with Lewis. Briggs was another monster who was top rated and easily feasted on. Tua was handely outboxed, etc...

Head to head, there are some fighters that I might favor slightly over him. I tend to think that a peak Tyson would at least have a chance, but I wouldn't bet money on it. Ali might have beaten him too by edging him in a decision, but again I'm not going to bet my life on it. At one point I would have picked a number of heavyweights to beat him, but after seriously thinking it through, I think he beats most of them, and certainly does better against the division as a whole than any other single man could.

[jaywheel]

To be honest, I have a hell of a time rating fighters. The heavyweight list is a difficult one. Sometimes I have guys sharing the same spots. One poster named Marciano-Frazier wrote some pretty good stuff on Ezzard Charles one day that persuaded me to think that he was top 10. I don't have anything against Walcott but I have developed a real appreciation for Ezzard Charles in recent months.

The problem lately with Charles is that people make him to be a top HW mostly based on his success at lower wieghts and the fact that he went up and had some relative success in the heavies. What he did as an heavy is what has to be considered here. He did much better than Moore or Spinks but still, I place rank him 10-15 all time.

[mr. magoo]

The problem lately with Charles is that people make him to be a top HW mostly based on his success at lower wieghts and the fact that he went up and had some relative success in the heavies. What he did as an heavy is what has to be considered here. He did much better than Moore or Spinks but still, I place rank him 10-15 all time.

10-15 is a reasonable ranking. I myself have him sitting right around 10. I guess the reason I like him so much is because his record is almost completely void of any padding whatsoever. He fought quality fighters back to back, months apart for years at a time. He reigned the heavyweight division through some 9 world title fights. He continued to be a top 3 heavyweight for like 3 years after losing the title. He was matched up with just about every profile of fighter, ie, punchers, swarmers, boxers, slicksters, boxer-punchers, etc... Now granted he had a lot of defeats, but frankly I can't think of anyone who had his career schedule, and if they had, it would have been interesting to see what their final record would have looked like.

[Privatejoker]

Powerpuncher.

"McCall beat 5 champions and 2 ATG top 10ers."

"He's 2-1 against ATG, better than Frazier."

You don't really believe this do you?

Frazier beat a 29 year old Ali in what was called "The Fight of the Century".

McCall beat a unmotivated Lewis (who at the time was not talked in the same breath as Ali) who made him cry in the rematch.

McCall beat a 45 year old Larry Holmes.

Those are the two ATG you have mentioned that McCall beat.

Beating a 29 year old Muhammad Ali (who is number 1 in my book) in a fight that was seen around the world and called "Fight of the Century" is better than anything McCall accomplised in beating pre-Manny Lewis and a 45 year old Holmes.

[Privatejoker]

McCall is only known for three fights, he lost two of them, guess who he beat? Lewis.

McCall is known for beating Lewis, Losing to Bruno and crying in the Lewis rematch.

I don't think he would have ever been world champ had he not faced Lewis, like i don't think Bruno would have become world champ if he hadn't fought McCall.

I would rather have Frazier's career than McCall's Powerpuncher.

"2-1 against ATG top 10ers."?

I would rather be known for beating a unbeaten Muhammad Ali than beating a pre-Manny Lewis or an old Larry.

[PowerPuncher]

Powerpuncher.

"McCall beat 5 champions and 2 ATG top 10ers."

"He's 2-1 against ATG, better than Frazier."

You don't really believe this do you?

Frazier beat a 29 year old Ali in what was called "The Fight of the Century".

McCall beat a unmotivated Lewis (who at the time was not talked in the same breath as Ali) who made him cry in the rematch.

McCall beat a 45 year old Larry Holmes.

Those are the two ATG you have mentioned that McCall beat.

Beating a 29 year old Muhammad Ali (who is number 1 in my book) in a fight that was seen around the world and called "Fight of the Century" is better than anything McCall accomplised in beating pre-Manny Lewis and a 45 year old Holmes.

No I was having a laugh but statistically it is true. Frazier is ofcourse league's better and has perhaps the best win ever

But McCall has his fair share of quality wins against champions/ranked fighters, Lennox, Maskeev, Akiwande, Sinal Sam, Seldon, Damiani. McCall is basic but his power, chin, strength are top draw

[Seamus]

I have no problem putting Lewis as high as number 3 on a very generous day. He certainly is top 5 in my book. The fighters he beat makes the pelts of Liston, Johnson, Foreman and Holmes look pretty tame.

[ChrisPontius]

Legally binding courtroom testimony under oath was taken to this effect during Jack's draft evasion trial in 1920, that $500 was accepted by Dempsey's camp to lose to Flynn. Dempsey's former wife Maxine testified to this. (Dempsey himself always referred to this as "the Flynn affair.")


Dempsey and his wife, objective observers like those should put the nail in the coffin of this dive-myth? Or should we just go by the primary reports who were independent and did not think it was a fix?



My admittedly subjective belief is that Lennox would have been down for the count in those situations, as he was against Rahman.


Which has absolutely nothing to do with what i stated, in that Holmes would have two TKO losses to fighters worse than McCall, had he had the same King referee.



In the specific cases of Toledo Dempsey and FOTC Frazier, this is indeed true. That Dempsey also dominated Tommy Gibbons over a full 15 rounds is critical in my esteem. Of course Lennox never had the opportunity to demonstrate he could do this. (I also believe that the Louis of the Godoy rematch probably would have ripped apart any version of Marciano.)


Mmm, Lewis never had the opportunity to show what? Beating the great Tommy Gibbons on points?

Or are you referring again to the 15 rounds? I did punch stat count a while ago, and Dempsey averaged something between 23 and 25 punches a round against Gibbons. Hardly a high workrate nor something of which i'd think Lewis would be incapable of doing, considering he threw double that (literally) over 12 rounds when he was 34 against someone who has 40 pounds on Gibbons.


Good to see you, by the way.

The pleasure is all mine. Maybe it won't surprise you if i told you i laughed when i read your opening post going on a serious tone "How would Lewis have fared under 15 round rules..?" I knew you couldn't let that one slip! :yep

[lefthook31]

Nah, never fought the best in their respective primes. Not sure he would have accomplished all he did had he started fighting the better fighters in lets say the late 80's. Guys like Bruno Mercer and Mcall were able to get to him easy early on. Regardless of what happened in the olympics, a completely different "pro" Bowe would have probably killed him. Tyson forcing him to brawl would have left him defenseless. He was not a complete fighter. He had no clue how to fight inside. Until Steward was able to teach him how to hold without getting Dq'd, that was a huge flaw in his game.

[ChrisPontius]

Nah, never fought the best in their respective primes. Not sure he would have accomplished all he did had he started fighting the better fighters in lets say the late 80's.


What, you mean the 80's greats like Berbick, Weaver, Tucker and Tubbs would've beaten him? :lol:


Guys like Bruno Mercer and Mcall were able to get to him easy early on.


Bruno won a few rounds and at best was ONE POINT ahead after 6 rounds, got stopped in the 7th. Since when are fights scored on a six-round basis? Ali was even with Folley after the 6th.


Regardless of what happened in the olympics, a completely different "pro" Bowe would have probably killed him.


You think he would've "probably killed him", but Bowe himself obviously didn't, or he would've just kept his word like a man and respected the contract that he signed - that is, he got his title shot against Holyfield because he promised to fight the winner of Lewis-Ruddock.



Tyson forcing him to brawl would have left him defenseless. He was not a complete fighter. He had no clue how to fight inside. Until Steward was able to teach him how to hold without getting Dq'd, that was a huge flaw in his game.

In 40 fights, 20 of which against top opposition, how often was Lewis defenseless? Exactly, never. As for not having a clue how to fight on the inside, i take it you've not seen his fights in a while, or you would've known that he tore Grant, Tyson, McCall (rematch), Klitschko, Mavrovic and others apart with the right uppercutl.

The holding thing is bullshit as well. Outside of the Tyson fight, where Cotton did the most biased referee job in the entire history of big boxing matches, Lewis was never even had a point taken for holding. Want to compare that to Tyson's elbowing, low blows, biting, Ali's holding behind the head, Holmes' thumbing, or Holyfield's constant headbutting? You're a hypocrite if you think this is a negative on Lewis' career.

[SuzieQ49]

I have to speak truthfully here. Lennox two one punch knockout losses to mediocre fighters in hasim rahman and oliver mccall while lewis was champion, leave a very bitter taste in my mouth. All the scope in the world just can't seem to get that taste out of my mouth.

[mr. magoo]

I have to speak truthfully here. Lennox two one punch knockout losses to mediocre fighters in hasim rahman and oliver mccall while lewis was champion, leave a very bitter taste in my mouth. All the scope in the world just can't seem to get that taste out of my mouth.


While the man had two very bad losses, he avenged both of them leaving him with the claim of being one of the few fighters to have beaten every man he ever faced. Additionally, he clobbered more supersized heavys that were in the primes of their careers, and with fairly impressive records than just about any champion ever did. Lastly, he arguably beat more rated fighters than just about anyone except for Ali and Louis. As another tid bit of interest, McCall and Rahman were ranked contenders. Its a common falacy on ESB for posters to refer to them as either journeyman or trial hoarses, and this is simply not the case.........

[Doppleganger]

I have to speak truthfully here. Lennox two one punch knockout losses to mediocre fighters in hasim rahman and oliver mccall while lewis was champion, leave a very bitter taste in my mouth. All the scope in the world just can't seem to get that taste out of my mouth.
If you're talking about Lewis's legacy, those 2 losses do hurt him when judging him at the very highest level. If you're talking about H2H ability and his ability to beat other ATGs then they don't matter one little bit at all. Unless of course Lewis plans to fight Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Marciano, Louis etc and a) step into another guy's delivered punch with his eyes closed whilst throwing his own or b) plan to fight them at altitude and fly in a few days before the fight.

The thing about Lewis's losses, which not too many other fighters can say, is that they were more about what Lewis didn't do rather than what the other guy did. The fact he beat both handily in the rematch speaks volumes and in the case of Rahman, didn't just beat him, dominated him and knocked him out with a perfect left-right combination.

[tysonlewisbook]

Lewis is the GOAT. Lewis showed his true self in both rematches. Lewis beat the game in the end too, the game didn't beat him. Lewis was smarter than ALi, Louis, etc. He left the game on his terms, when he was still on top, with his health and wealth intact. Lewis physically was too big and too smart for anyone, when he was at his best. Lewis's style was smarter than Ali's, he was too smart to sit there and take beatings. Lewis would control range on Ali and Ali would be the one forced to take risks. Lewis at his best, would defeat any version of Ali. Lennox Lewis is the greatest of all time.

But both Klitschko's are making a case to join him on that pantheon.

[lefthook31]

What, you mean the 80's greats like Berbick, Weaver, Tucker and Tubbs would've beaten him? :lol:



Bruno won a few rounds and at best was ONE POINT ahead after 6 rounds, got stopped in the 7th. Since when are fights scored on a six-round basis? Ali was even with Folley after the 6th.



You think he would've "probably killed him", but Bowe himself obviously didn't, or he would've just kept his word like a man and respected the contract that he signed - that is, he got his title shot against Holyfield because he promised to fight the winner of Lewis-Ruddock.




In 40 fights, 20 of which against top opposition, how often was Lewis defenseless? Exactly, never. As for not having a clue how to fight on the inside, i take it you've not seen his fights in a while, or you would've known that he tore Grant, Tyson, McCall (rematch), Klitschko, Mavrovic and others apart with the right uppercutl.

The holding thing is bullshit as well. Outside of the Tyson fight, where Cotton did the most biased referee job in the entire history of big boxing matches, Lewis was never even had a point taken for holding. Want to compare that to Tyson's elbowing, low blows, biting, Ali's holding behind the head, Holmes' thumbing, or Holyfield's constant headbutting? You're a hypocrite if you think this is a negative on Lewis' career.

Bruno won a few rounds against him???:lol::lol: He was knocking him from pillar to post. Lewis was lucky to land that leaping punch he threw with his eyes closed. What about the Mercer fight??? Loss!! Rahman, Mcall, all second tier fighters. Lewis was not a consistent fighter early on, he was clumbsy, sloppy, and he was lost on the inside.
Douglas was leagues better than any of them, and Tyson lost to one guy in his prime. Even if it was the best prepared version of Tyson that fought Douglas, it would still be acceptable in my opinion. The fact of the matter as much as you may hate Tyson, is that he wasnt prepared for that fight.
You want to call the fights with Akinwande Grant and Bruno good infighting skills? Thats just pure comedy. To me, especially in the Bruno fight, that was some of the most blatant cheating I have ever seen, and he should have been suspended for the way he held Bruno's head up with his left hand and landed the right uppercut.
Funny how Emanuel Steward trained Mcall for the Lewis fight, and knew exactly what to do to beat Lewis, because he knew he had a lot of flaws at that time. Flaws that a well trained Bowe would have easily been able to take advantage of as well. I dont want to get into the politics of boxing contracts that may have prevented fights (Lewis dumping his title to avoid Byrd), the fact is that Bowe was a much improved fighter when he became pro. Just like Lewis improved under Steward tremendously.
Lewis would have been killed by Bowe had they fought after the Dokes fight. Wait your going to tell me he crushed Ruddock right? Ruddock was brutalized by Tyson in two susequent fights, and went on to get smashed by the great Tommy Morrison.
Lewis cemented his legacy starting with a shot Razor Ruddock, and topping it off with washed up guys like Holyfield, and Tyson and didnt look all that great doing it. He dominated a slew of barely contenders, guys that in my opinion would have been outclassed overall by the contenders of the 80's.
To Lewis credit, I do believe he would have been a lot more competitive had he fought those guys after hitting his prime under Emanuel Steward, but I still would have picked a prime Bowe and prime Tyson to beat him handidly. Those two had the ability to make Lewis fight a fight he was not capable of handeling, unlike all of the contenders of the 90's. Besides Mercer in 95, who many people felt beat him, and didnt punch nearly as hard as Tyson or Bowe, no other fighter was able to put Lewis in a real fire fight to expose his biggest flaw.

[Privatejoker]

As the other posters have said.

No G.O.A.T. loses not once, but twice to two c-list fighters at his prime or close to it while world champion by one shot.

[mcvey]

Foreman thinks so, or at least thought so.

These aren't my thoughts, just arguments I've heard before. I'm interested in hearing everyone elses views.


He's beaten every man he's faced in a very strong era of heavyweight boxing, easilly the strongest since the 70s.

Tyson, Holyfield, Klitschko, Tua etc.

Retired at the top. One of only 2 men to beat Vitali.


EDIT: A few people are saying where they'd rank him. I'd be interested to see who's ahead/behind on your lists too. Cheers.


Any thoughts?

He makes my top 10 ,but not top 5 ,having said that I find it hard to pick many champs to beat him h2h.I didnt particularly care for his style, but he was undeniably effective, and ducked no one.

[p.Townend]

Lennox is a great champ but not the greatest ever.Others have achived more.Im not a massive fan of Ali`s fights but he did fight and beat pretty much everyone around as did Louis.

[MAG1965]

Foreman thinks so, or at least thought so.

These aren't my thoughts, just arguments I've heard before. I'm interested in hearing everyone elses views.


He's beaten every man he's faced in a very strong era of heavyweight boxing, easilly the strongest since the 70s.

Tyson, Holyfield, Klitschko, Tua etc.

Retired at the top. One of only 2 men to beat Vitali.


EDIT: A few people are saying where they'd rank him. I'd be interested to see who's ahead/behind on your lists too. Cheers.


Any thoughts?
No he is not the greatest ever or close, but he is in the top 10. He was benefitted from being the first big heavyweight champ who was good. He is good and his right is great, but not close. His foot positioning is terrible. Foreman saying he is great didn't mean anything. Anyone who heard George on HBO knew that most of the things he said as a boxing commentator were ridiculous.

[tysonlewisbook]

We should value your opinion about Lewis over Foreman's??? Actually Vitali called Lewis the greatest ever also but he worded it as strongest, but meaning greatest.

Lewis was the greatest, maybe not the most colorful or charismatic or the most popular in the US but he was the greatest to ever lace em up. And he had more class, never had to call opponents classless names as Ali did to Frazier and others. Lewis brought class honor and dignity to HWT boxing, the ultimate class champion in and out of the ring.

[lefthook31]

We should value your opinion about Lewis over Foreman's??? Actually Vitali called Lewis the greatest ever also but he worded it as strongest, but meaning greatest.

Lewis was the greatest, maybe not the most colorful or charismatic or the most popular in the US but he was the greatest to ever lace em up. And he had more class, never had to call opponents classless names as Ali did to Frazier and others. Lewis brought class honor and dignity to HWT boxing, the ultimate class champion in and out of the ring.

Class has nothing to do with ranking him as the greatest. So if Vitali called Lewis the greatest, that should mean he is??
Again the fact that Lewis was knocked out twice, not once, twice by second tier heavyweights, got a gift win over Ray Mercer, another second tier heavyweight, shows he wasnt even close to being the greatest to ever lace them up.

[tysonlewisbook]

How is Ali consdiered the greatest when he got his jaw broke by a mediocre puncher Norton, got gift wins over Doug Jones and Jimmy Young, looked like a zombie vs. Holmes, and had to have his trainer cheat to beat Henry Cooper?

You have to look at Ali and Lewis at their best, not their worst. And Lewis at his best has more than enough to outjab and control the range on Ali, forcing Ali to be the one to take risks and force his way in, take him out of his comfort zone, which we never saw Ali have to do.

Lewis was smarter, bigger, stronger, and had more class than Ali. Smarter in the sense that he knew when to get out and his fighting style was smarter in that he didn't just sit on the ropes and absorb punishment. Ali was great no doubt, but a bigger better more superior fighting machine came along.

And eventually another will naturally evolve that will outdo Lewis. Perhaps it's the Klitschkos.

It's silly to believe that ALi is the end all be all of great HWT champs, he's just a link in the chain.

[Maxmomer]

How is Ali consdiered the greatest when he got his jaw broke by a mediocre puncher Norton, got gift wins over Doug Jones and Jimmy Young, looked like a zombie vs. Holmes, and had to have his trainer cheat to beat Henry Cooper?

You have to look at Ali and Lewis at their best, not their worst. And Lewis at his best has more than enough to outjab and control the range on Ali, forcing Ali to be the one to take risks and force his way in, take him out of his comfort zone, which we never saw Ali have to do.

Lewis was smarter, bigger, stronger, and had more class than Ali. Smarter in the sense that he knew when to get out and his fighting style was smarter in that he didn't just sit on the ropes and absorb punishment. Ali was great no doubt, but a bigger better more superior fighting machine came along.

And eventually another will naturally evolve that will outdo Lewis. Perhaps it's the Klitschkos.

It's silly to believe that ALi is the end all be all of great HWT champs, he's just a link in the chain.

You're super fucking wrong about most of the things you just said.

[McGrain]

You're super fucking wrong about most of the things you just said.

I agree.

[Duodenum]

You have to look at Ali and Lewis at their best, not their worst. And Lewis at his best has more than enough to outjab and control the range on Ali, forcing Ali to be the one to take risks and force his way in, take him out of his comfort zone, which we never saw Ali have to do.That's probably what Ernie Terrell thought about himself before getting schooled and nearly shut out over 15 rounds.Lewis was smarter, bigger, stronger, and had more class than Ali.Yes, but he was neither faster or tougher. Speed and endurance kills.his fighting style was smarter in that he didn't just sit on the ropes and absorb punishment.Neither did Ali during the 1960s.Ali was great no doubt, but a bigger better more superior fighting machine came along.Yeah, that bigger and better superior fighting machine was named Foreman. Oh, wait.....

[tysonlewisbook]

Foreman was an arm puncher. big and strong but always susceptible to being outboxed by boxing skills.

you have 30 years of media conditioning to program the idea Ali was the greatest HWT fighter ever. through TV, film, media, print media. ALi ALi ALi. Yes he was great. Yes he was once the greatest. But he was surpassed, boxing past him by. But if you want to beleive Ali was and always will be the greatest, always your special champion and inspiration, nothing wrong with that.

[JohnThomas1]

Foreman was an arm puncher. big and strong but always susceptible to being outboxed by boxing skills.


So his uppercut was the product of an "arm puncher"?

[lefthook31]

I think you have to evaluate these fighters in their respective eras. Ali was just barely 200 pounds or under during his prime. How do you compare that to a guy who is 250 in the similar type of physical condition? Its hard to do that.
Then you have to look at the competition in their respective eras and at which time the fights took place.
How can you say Lewis was the greatest? 95% of the contenders he fought never became champion or did anything in the sport. He fought Tyson and Holyfield well past their primes. Some of the better contenders he did fight in his prime, Mcall, Mercer, Bruno, Rahman, he struggled a bit.
The only way you could say something like that is speculation as to how his career would have turned out had he fought better guys in his career, and thats not to say it was Lewis' fault, he was a late bloomer. Had he fought Bowe, Tyson, and Holyfield at their respective peaks and beaten them, then you could make an arguement for GOAT.

[flamengo]

Not quite journeymen are they...

These things happen...it's boxing...bit harsh to judge his career on the 2 defeats...

.. put 2 defeats on Marcianos record, he'd have the same value as Baer or Sharkey.

[JohnThomas1]

.. put 2 defeats on Marcianos record, he'd have the same value as Baer of Sharkey.

How about SRR, Henry Armstrong, Ezzard Charles, Muhammad Ali, RJJ, etc etc.

Good to see ya too mate!

[flamengo]

journeymen dont become world champs or contenders

Sub-average fighters have contested and won world titles/ lost the contest for world titles...

One single win is often the difference between CHAMP and JOURNEYMAN.

[flamengo]

How about SRR, Henry Armstrong, Ezzard Charles, Muhammad Ali, RJJ, etc etc.

Good to see ya too mate!

alls good. :good

[tysonlewisbook]

Bowe refused to fight Lewis in his prime, was obviously not confident enough. Tyson paid Lewis $4million in stepaside with promise he'd fight Lewis next after Seldon - or be stripped. He renegged on that agreement and vacated thebelt rather than fight Lewis in 96. Can't blame Lewis if he was too good that he frightened away his most formidable threats.

Did Ali ever scare anyone away like that?

Listen, they both greats of their time. I prefer Lewis's career, you prefer Ali's.

[Ponysmallhorse]

To answer the question - H2H yes maybe lewis is #1 Hw of all time. But in achievements he is long behind Ali and Luis and even Mike. Mike did very hard thing he collected all belts one by one in less than 2 years and defended titles 6 times in two next years.

[janitor]

Did Ali ever scare anyone away like that?


Good question.

Ali didnt.

Louis didnt.

Obviously no fighter who was curently the lineal champion got avoided.

No fighter in history ever avoided a big payday whatever the odds!!!!!!

Sam Lanbgford and Harry Wills were equaly avoided.

The only fighter who held a title who got avoided by challengers, to my knowledge is Jack Johnson.

[El Cepillo]

I think #3 is fair.

[Vanboxingfan]

I think you have to evaluate these fighters in their respective eras. Ali was just barely 200 pounds or under during his prime. How do you compare that to a guy who is 250 in the similar type of physical condition? Its hard to do that.
Then you have to look at the competition in their respective eras and at which time the fights took place.
How can you say Lewis was the greatest? 95% of the contenders he fought never became champion or did anything in the sport. He fought Tyson and Holyfield well past their primes. Some of the better contenders he did fight in his prime, Mcall, Mercer, Bruno, Rahman, he struggled a bit.
The only way you could say something like that is speculation as to how his career would have turned out had he fought better guys in his career, and thats not to say it was Lewis' fault, he was a late bloomer. Had he fought Bowe, Tyson, and Holyfield at their respective peaks and beaten them, then you could make an arguement for GOAT.


Maybe it's just me but it seems to me that Lewis' win over Vitali is looming larger and larger in terms significance the more Vitali continues to dominate the division (albeit his age is showing). In addition to that, I think it also blows your post out of the water about fighting champions past their respective primes. Having said that you're the type of anti-Lewis poster I fully expect to question the victory.

BTW, you probably don't remember but we had a back and forth discussion on Lewis about 2 years ago in the general forum. Glad you're still posting here.

[MrMarvel]

I think you have to evaluate these fighters in their respective eras. Ali was just barely 200 pounds or under during his prime. How do you compare that to a guy who is 250 in the similar type of physical condition? Its hard to do that.

I disagree. Joe Louis was knocking out fighters who were as big a Lewis. Louis was smaller than Ali.

[MrMarvel]

I agree.

So do I.

[MrMarvel]

I have to speak truthfully here. Lennox two one punch knockout losses to mediocre fighters in hasim rahman and oliver mccall while lewis was champion, leave a very bitter taste in my mouth. All the scope in the world just can't seem to get that taste out of my mouth.

I agree.

[MrMarvel]

1. Joe Louis - Joe Louis was a natural instinctive boxer.

On the contrary. He was robotic and inflexible.

[Vanboxingfan]

On the contrary. He was robotic and inflexible.


Hard to watch him fight and actually come to that conclussion, at least in my opinion.

[lefthook31]

Maybe it's just me but it seems to me that Lewis' win over Vitali is looming larger and larger in terms significance the more Vitali continues to dominate the division (albeit his age is showing). In addition to that, I think it also blows your post out of the water about fighting champions past their respective primes. Having said that you're the type of anti-Lewis poster I fully expect to question the victory.

BTW, you probably don't remember but we had a back and forth discussion on Lewis about 2 years ago in the general forum. Glad you're still posting here.

Ive been away for a while. I have lost a lot of interest in boxing with all the PPV crap and the lack of talent.
As far as Lewis, I felt he won the Vitali fight, and I think he did exactly what needed to be done to face a fighter that was taller and had the awkward style of Vitali. He knew he would eventually break Vitali down, and he needed to keep pressing the fight. That being said, you cant ever compare Vitali who at that time was considered to be at his peak, better than Tyson or Bowe, or Holyfield at their respective peaks. Vitali is a good solid fighter, but nothing special, and he is fighting in an era of total garbage talent. I wouldnt call his recent resume domination over the division either, he hasnt been an active fighter.

[lefthook31]

I disagree. Joe Louis was knocking out fighters who were as big a Lewis. Louis was smaller than Ali.

Dont know too much about Louis comp, but I know people are generally bigger and stronger now with technology in diet and exercise. They may have been big but were they equal in size and strength? Were talking about Lewis at 240 ripped.

[hugo]

I think while the old times have a lot of sentimental value, a natural beauty and a setting that is very hard to emulate, Lewis (and maybe the Klits) would stand a very good chance of winning fights with the old school elite fighters, maybe even dominating some.

The arguments have been said above - advances in sports/nutrition science, overwhelming increase in size.

In the Ali vs Patterson fight Ali weight in at around 218 and Patterson at (!)188. Honestly I can not imagine a Pac vs DLH scenario.

[tysonlewisbook]

Jack Dempsey got knocked out in the first round before he won the title. Jack Johnson got stopped twice before he beat Burns. But these losses are forgotten now when we think of their careers.

Carlos Monzon had some losses early in his career.

With Lewis, people hold his losses against him. Rather than understand how those losses strengthened and made him a greater and more complete and experienced mature champion. To overcome losses like that as Lewis did, to win the rematches as he did, truly affirm what a special champion Lennox Lewis was at his best.

It's the same thing with Wladimir, his losses have helped to form him into the incredible unbeatable machine he is now. Like a blessing in disguise.

[Achilleslststnd]

Comparison between eras is certainly not science. More (generally the youngest or newest "afficionados") are swayed that today's taller/heavier fighters would easily be competitive with the best of yesterday. The advantages of diet, technology, standard of living, sport's science, medicine, equipment, etc., etc., are all factors which affect one's conclusions but are impossible to apportion or quantify whether placing current fighters in yesterday's environment or the reverse.

Which way are you guys looking at the comparison? Are you "time machining" today's fighters back to the past or altering the past great by attributing some bump from the more favorable environment of today?

And, while it is easy to simplify and envision a 6'7" heavyweight of today having an extreme size advantage over a 6'0" fighter from the past what about the linear contribution of what came first? [For clarity, I recognize that fighting has been around forever.] In my case (descriptively), it began in the late-60s (watching all of the replayed fights of the '30s - '50s - Louis & Marciano, in particular) and the first fight I saw in real-time (closed-circuit projection screen) was Ali/Frazier I in '71. Starting from this time vantage point, it was (seemingly) clear that Clay/Ali was the antecedent (though in fact he may not have been to someone even older) for what was later seen in Sugar Ray Leonard, Howard Davis, Meldrick Taylor, Roy Jones, Jr., Shane Mosley, Bowe, Lennox Lewis, just a multitude of names (you can add a dozen more of your own).

While it is certainly evident that even if Ali had never (been born) become a boxer there would likely have been the same type of developments that I attribute to his specific influence. Still, one wonders how you can contemplate a Lennox Lewis without an Ali being available for his study and pugilistic education? A bit of the chicken and the egg I suppose.

It seems that the comparison between eras becomes even cloudier when you attempt to generously reward today's fighters for what they are and not take into account that the prior generation's fighters are the shoulders they are standing upon so as to not have to "reinvent the wheel" so to speak (ignore my confused mixed metaphors or whatever).

[Duodenum]

Jack Dempsey got knocked out in the first round before he won the title.Again, there is a cloud of controversy over the legitimacy of this event.Jack Johnson got stopped twice before he beat Burns. But these losses are forgotten now when we think of their careers.Joe Choynski is in the IBHOF largely because of his third round knockout win over Johnson, so that is hardly a forgotten defeat. Together in jail afterwards, Choynski taught Lil' Artha' many tricks of the trade which eventually helped him gain the championship.Carlos Monzon had some losses early in his career.

With Lewis, people hold his losses against him.This is because those defeats did not occur when he was at an embryonic stage of his boxing, but was the matured world champion in full career when he got dethroned.

Ali went through 19 straight title defenses as champion before Leon Spinks finally dethroned him. Larry Holmes was the first undefeated boxer to win 20 consecutive title defenses over eight consecutive calendar years. Joe Louis defended 25 times without getting dethroned. These are amazing winning streaks.

Lewis first lost the title after just three defenses in under a year and a half. The second time he lost it was after nine defenses in four years, an impressive streak, but not in the ballpark of what Louis, Ali and Holmes achieved.

[Privatejoker]

What is up with Tysonlewisbook geezer?

Lewis not the G.O.AT.

Deal with it.

Dissing on Ali, criticising him for his past prime performances, even though he won most of them?

Come on man, Lewis had problems with guys who could jab with him, Bruno, Mercer, Rahman early rounds, none of them are Ali.

How can you claim Lewis is smarter than Muhammad?

When Lewis was fighting, no-one even claimed that he was better than Ali, forget what Foreman said, we all know Foreman was just being graceful.

Lewis got KO'd by two c-list guys, not once, but twice while he was champion, that never happened to Ali.

Two right hand shots that landed once. Would Ali need two bites at the cherry to beat McCall or Rahman?

Norton was better than McCall or Rahman, is just that Norton fought in a much tougher era when there was one champ. McCall and Rahman only became champs because they beat Lewis.

And you bring that Ali had his jaw broke by Norton. So? He was out of shape and still went 12 rounds he was not KO'd. Lets see Lewis fight 12 rounds with a broken jaw.

In fact, lets see Lewis win a fight when he has been dropped.

Bringing up the Cooper fight, are you crazy? He won. He was a 21 year old 202 pounds skinny guy who took Henry lightly, plus he travelled to Wembley in front of 45,000.

Lewis got KO'd man, i like Lewis but for you to say he was "Smarter" or "Classier" than Ali is damm right stupid.

Ali is the greatest sportsman ever, because he was the total package, one of the most recognised men in history who has done more for this sport than Lewis ever has.

How old are you? Where were you when Lewis, a unmotivated fat Lewis got KO'd by Rahman? Were you laughing then? Were you claiming Lewis was the G.O.A.T?

Ali confirmed his greatness by beatinng Liston, Frazier and Foreman. Who did Lewis beat that gives credibilty to your arguement that he's G.O.AT? All you talk about is size and some skill for your reasoning. Ali was no 5'10" 184 pound Marciano with rudiamentary skills, that is when Lewis size would come into it.

Lewis was outsped by Shannon Briggs for two rounds before he ran out of gas. Briggs ain't nowhere near the speed of Ali, or has the chin of Ali.

Mercer was heavier than Ali but was not "smarter" "Classier" "Faster" or anything but some people think he beat Lewis, he even showed a better jab.

Lewis didn't even have the best jab of his era or even the last 25-30 years, Larry Holmes's jab was vastly better. Lewis wasn't the best fighter of his own era, Holyfield takes that title. Evander beat far better dudes. Can you imagine the shot 2002 Tyson against a peak Holmes? That jab would have looked far better than Lewis who pawed for 4-5 rounds with it until he knew Mike was done.

Lewis fought a 210 pound Mavrovic who he couldn't drop or KO, who went 12. Why was Lewis's size and weight not a factor? Shouldn't he destroy that guy? Was that guy Ali?

[dannylatics]

1. Lewis
2. Ali
3. Louis
4. Holmes
5. Foreman

just my opinion, in term of opponents Ali obviously faced the tougher, but I think prime Lewis around the Tyson fight would have beaten any heavyweight, he was too smart with the jab and his right hand was lethal

Altho, I do think Big George with his power in his prime before the ali fight would have caused big problems for Lewis with his power

[groove]

The tyson Lewis beat was ruined by Holyfield 5 years prior to that fight and even in 1997 he wasn't nowhere near the 1988 peak version. tyson 1988 v 2002 lewis. be a great fight and many would pick tyson to win by early KO cuz of his 2 early losses by KO.

[anon1]

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Liston
4. Holmes
5. Foreman

These 5 would defeat Lewis at least 2/3 fights. Ali wins every time.

The rest of my top 10 list...

6. Lennox Lewis
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Evander Holyfield
9. Rocky Marciano
10. Joe Frazier

I also think that prime Holyfield would outwork and outpoint Lewis. I still rate Lewis higher than Holyfield because Lewis would do better H2H against other ATGs. When I rank fighters, I go by H2H and track record. Normally I give a little bit more weight to H2H because it's unfair that some fighters got to face opponents who were meant or them while others did not.

[Privatejoker]

If Lewis was the G.O.AT. why are most of the matchups people dream of are Lewis v Holmes 81 or Bowe or Lewis v Tyson pre melt down or Evander of 1990-1993?

Because these guys set the standard for the 80's and early 90's before Lewis was even on the scene. They were also great Heavyweights.

We don't even know for sure if Lewis could beat those guys who were near or in his own era. He never fought the versions of those i mentioned. He fought a 36-37 Evander, a 35 year old Tyson, a 36 year old Mercer who a 42 year old Holmes bitch slapped (and looked better against).

I think Ali is the Greatest, thats my opinion, with Joe Louie next to him, but at least i have Joe Louis and Ali's entire career and fighters to back up my opinon.

What is most people's back up of Lewis? Size, strength, skill. Yes, those things might work against slower unskilled guys. But we are talking about Ali.

Joe Louis whatever they say was a greater Heavy than Lewis, forget about size, if you take size out of the equation, Joe is a better fighter who made 25 defences or near 12 years and only lost to an ex champ (pre peak after being battered for 12 rounds), a current champ while shot (Ezzard Charles) and at 37 got stopped against a young hungry Marciano who would go on to be a ATG.

Not bad, Louis and Ali are 1 & 2 interchangable. Joe Louis never lost to a McCall or Rahman. Both of those men lose to joe in my eyes despite their advantages.

Lewis was not even the greatest heavyweight the last 30 years years, we had Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe who were Champions pre Lewis. Far more exciting than Lewis where every fight was an event pretty much. They were all Undisputed (Holmes never unified but they was no doubt from 1980 to 1985 he was the linear champion).

Lewis won the WBC vacant title (TWICE) and never beat a reigning champ to get it (yes Bowe was a disgrace for that and McCall was a cry baby).

He was never recognised as the main heavyweight of the world until 1999 (when he was 34), which was the first time he truly beat a reigning champion which was a 37 year old shopworn Evander.

He never had a FOTC or RITJ or Thrilla, fights the entire world cared for. Remember Africa when Ali was there?

Remember South Africa when Lewis was there? No one really got excited. I know he was only fighting Rahman, but Ali could fight Al Blue Lewis in Ireland or Bugner in Asia and it would draw more excitement.

Ali won his titles by beating reigning Undisputed champs (the first two guys were favoured to beat him). Even while he was shot to bits he regained his title against Leon Spinks (yes Ali should not of lost the first time against a novice, but the Ali that fought Spinks the first time was the worst version of Ali until the Holmes fight).

Ali never lost his title legit until he was 36, fat, untrained against a 24 year old hungry guy in a fight were Ali showed his champ heart again, that 15th round Ali was shot the bits but tried as hard as hell to KO Spinks at all costs to hold on to his title.

Lewis got KO'd twice. He never lost by decision or went all out to avoid defeat when the odds were against him in later rounds because he was never in that position in those fights, he just got KO'd.

Remember the shot Ali v SHAVERS in rounds 14 and 15? That's a shot Ali.

Mercer was the only guy that Lewis beat that looked like they could beat him over the stretch. And Mercer is no Liston, Frazier or Foreman.

[anut]

I would say 2nd or 3rd best..........if he woulda beat prime tyson and holy there could be a case for 1st.....but both guys were past it....especially tyson.//////so i say 2nd or 3rd best.

[Flea Man]

If Lewis was the G.O.AT. why are most of the matchups people dream of are Lewis v Holmes 81 or Bowe or Lewis v Tyson pre melt down or Evander of 1990-1993?

Because these guys set the standard for the 80's and early 90's before Lewis was even on the scene. They were also great Heavyweights.

We don't even know for sure if Lewis could beat those guys who were near or in his own era. He never fought the versions of those i mentioned. He fought a 36-37 Evander, a 35 year old Tyson, a 36 year old Mercer who a 42 year old Holmes bitch slapped (and looked better against).

I think Ali is the Greatest, thats my opinion, with Joe Louie next to him, but at least i have Joe Louis and Ali's entire career and fighters to back up my opinon.

What is most people's back up of Lewis? Size, strength, skill. Yes, those things might work against slower unskilled guys. But we are talking about Ali.

Joe Louis whatever they say was a greater Heavy than Lewis, forget about size, if you take size out of the equation, Joe is a better fighter who made 25 defences or near 12 years and only lost to an ex champ (pre peak after being battered for 12 rounds), a current champ while shot (Ezzard Charles) and at 37 got stopped against a young hungry Marciano who would go on to be a ATG.

Not bad, Louis and Ali are 1 & 2 interchangable. Joe Louis never lost to a McCall or Rahman. Both of those men lose to joe in my eyes despite their advantages.

Lewis was not even the greatest heavyweight the last 30 years years, we had Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe who were Champions pre Lewis. Far more exciting than Lewis where every fight was an event pretty much. They were all Undisputed (Holmes never unified but they was no doubt from 1980 to 1985 he was the linear champion).

Lewis won the WBC vacant title (TWICE) and never beat a reigning champ to get it (yes Bowe was a disgrace for that and McCall was a cry baby).

He was never recognised as the main heavyweight of the world until 1999 (when he was 34), which was the first time he truly beat a reigning champion which was a 37 year old shopworn Evander.

He never had a FOTC or RITJ or Thrilla, fights the entire world cared for. Remember Africa when Ali was there?

Remember South Africa when Lewis was there? No one really got excited. I know he was only fighting Rahman, but Ali could fight Al Blue Lewis in Ireland or Bugner in Asia and it would draw more excitement.

Ali won his titles by beating reigning Undisputed champs (the first two guys were favoured to beat him). Even while he was shot to bits he regained his title against Leon Spinks (yes Ali should not of lost the first time against a novice, but the Ali that fought Spinks the first time was the worst version of Ali until the Holmes fight).

Ali never lost his title legit until he was 36, fat, untrained against a 24 year old hungry guy in a fight were Ali showed his champ heart again, that 15th round Ali was shot the bits but tried as hard as hell to KO Spinks at all costs to hold on to his title.

Lewis got KO'd twice. He never lost by decision or went all out to avoid defeat when the odds were against him in later rounds because he was never in that position in those fights, he just got KO'd.

Remember the shot Ali v SHAVERS in rounds 14 and 15? That's a shot Ali.

Mercer was the only guy that Lewis beat that looked like they could beat him over the stretch. And Mercer is no Liston, Frazier or Foreman.

You only have a low post count PrivateJoker but welcome to the Classic Forum, your input is very much appreciated :good

[Bokaj]

If Lewis had beaten Tyson, Holyfield and Bowe when they were in or near their primes, his three best wins would more or less equal Ali's. But Ali would still have about 20 more wins against ranked opposition - many of which came after a long lay-off, something that Lewis never had to contend with. Lewis would still also have his two KO defeats, an indignity Ali never suffered (I don't think his TKO against Holmes is comparable).

That gives a clue as to the gulf between their resumes.

[Privatejoker]

Some people only say Lewis is G.O.AT. based just on size and strength, Lewis was not the most skillful heavyweight of all time.

Even Jersey Joe Walcott looks more skillful on black and white than Lewis in colour.

That uppercut on Charles is on par with Lewis's KO of Rahman.

Of course i favor Lewis over Walcott, but i am talking about skills and natural ability.

He is the greatest Super-Heavyweight.

But the Super-Heavyweight Divison does not exist, so he goes down the picking order of great champions, but Lennox is up there, don't get me wrong, he just ain't greater than Joe Louis or Ali.

[RockyJim]

Uhhhh,....No...

[manbearpig]

Pointless thread.

FAIL

[Beeston Brawler]

I have him firmly in the #3 position