The best Lennox Lewis vs The best Evander Holyfield: Who wins?

[hobgoblin]

Lewis clearly won the second fight but it was competitive. Lennox was no young billygoat himself in this fight. Pick your best version of Lennox. How would he improve his performance in 1999?

1999 Holyfield was considerably removed from his prime since (a) he engaged in 3 wars with Bowe, 1.5 wars with Tyson, not to mention Foreman, Dokes, Qawi etc - these things make you age very quickly (b)37 years old and clearly no longer a prime athlete (c) He showed signs of reduced work rate, speed & reflexes, skill etc.

I think Lennox would not be able to improve his performance significantly (because he was so good in 1999) whereas Holyfield would have a much greater work rate to earn more points, would have the speed and reflexes as a young man he didn't have at 37 to better box the larger Lennox and better avoid Lennox's brutal shots. This plus his optimal skills at 29 - I think he would SIGNIFICANTLY improve his performance to decision Lennox. It goes without saying, that this match up would be very competitive (just IMO in favor of Holy this time).

Lennox's increase in speed & reflexes wouldn't be as helpful because again, he was very good for a 37 year old. I consider this Lennox's greatest achievment (and a win over a legit version of Holy but NOT a prime Holy who was a much better fight for Lennox). So gentlemen, where am I going wrong here? Explain.

[Unforgiven]

I think a younger peak (1990) Holyfield would have a great chance of out-working Lennox Lewis.
The truth is, Holyfield lost the intense youthful edge sometime around '93/'94. He was certainly at his best when he fought Douglas and Foreman, despite the critics negative slant on those fights. (in fact, there's been a negative slant put on almost everything Holyfield does, for some reason).

Having said that, Lennox Lewis had a style that might always beat Holyfield. Lewis at his best doesn't like to engage too much, very cautious, very calculating. Holyfield has always thrived as against aggression, he's a tremendous counter-puncher and counter-attacker. But he's forced to push the action and chase his man against the laid back Lewis, and Holyfield is less impressive in that mode.

Prime for prime, it's too close to call.

[hobgoblin]

I think a younger peak (1990) Holyfield would have a great chance of out-working Lennox Lewis.

That's my key argument. This improvement over the competitive 1999 fight would give him the decision.

[PATSYS]

If they fight 10 out of 10, Lewis beats Holyfield every single time.

By huge margin in 3 of those fights, and the rest of the 7 fight by close boring UD or could be MD/SD.

But Holyfield, as great as he is, will never solve the problem that is called Lennox. The combination of size, skills and ring intelligence is just too much to overcome for the ex-cruiserweight.

[Big Ukrainian]

Evander by very close UD or late TKO. Holyfield was well past his prime in 99. Lewis was in prime at the time. Still their second fight was very close (Roy Jones Jr., Duva, Angelo Dundee, both Klitschko, Mark Rathner, Larry Holmes gave it to Holyfield ).

[hobgoblin]

If they fight 10 out of 10, Lewis beats Holyfield every single time.

By huge margin in 3 of those fights, and the rest of the 7 fight by close boring UD or could be MD/SD.

But Holyfield, as great as he is, will never solve the problem that is called Lennox. The combination of size, skills and ring intelligence is just too much to overcome for the ex-cruiserweight.

I strongly disagree with the little reasoning you provided. Ring intelligence? Holyfield may have had a temper problem in the ring at times - but he was a brilliant tactician and one of the cleverests ever. Lewis at best could break even with him here. Skills? I don't think Lewis had better boxing skills than Holyfield. Obviously it is ridiculous to judge "Lewis" without his awesome power, but if you want to zone in on skill or boxing ability alone - see that Lewis had a tougher time against Mercer when his power wasn't a factor whereas the lighter handed Holyfield beat Mercer for convincingly with boxing skills. Size difference? Holy made up for it with his speed, strategy, etc.

"Ex-cruiserweight"? If that was the case then why was the second fight so competitive when Holyfield was clearly much past his best than Lennox? Can you refute my reasoning in the first post and tell me where I'm going wrong with the idea of improvements?

[Shake]

Bit strange to suggest seven out of ten fights may be SD, but Holy could never ever get the nod.

[bb251]

I think a '90-'91 version of Holy has a pretty decent shot at a '95-'96 Lewis... Just by the number of punches he would have thrown would've given him a chance... Remember that version of Holy only weighed about 208ish... I don't think he stops Lewis nor do I believe Lewis stops him... I think the most likely outcome would've been a split decision for Lewis though... Too big, and that jab would make it pretty tough for Holy..

[rendog67]

IMO any active version of Lewis from early nineties to retirement takes it by decision every time.

[shelterr]

I think Lewis wins this fight 8 out of ten fights. If Lennox happened to have an off night Holy could get a close decision (ala Holy-Bowe II) but it would never be convincing. Lewis' Jab, Height, and ability to fight at a distance would ALWAYS trouble any version of Holyfield. Prime Holy lost to prime Bowe and that Bowe didn't want any part of a pre-Steward Lennox Lewis. That should pretty much sum it up. It's a "styles make fights" deal. It's why Bowe always had the edge over Holyfield, So too would Lennox Lewis.

[Unforgiven]

I think Lewis wins this fight 8 out of ten fights. If Lennox happened to have an off night Holy could get a close decision (ala Holy-Bowe II) but it would never be convincing. Lewis' Jab, Height, and ability to fight at a distance would ALWAYS trouble any version of Holyfield. Prime Holy lost to prime Bowe and that Bowe didn't want any part of a pre-Steward Lennox Lewis. That should pretty much sum it up. It's a "styles make fights" deal. It's why Bowe always had the edge over Holyfield, So too would Lennox Lewis.

I dont think Bowe's "edge over" Holyfield is the same as Lewis over Holyfield.

Actually, I think Holyfield completely under-estimated Bowe's heart and he simply tried to out-slug him. But Bowe turned out to be a great infighter, AND a gutsy fighter.
Holyfield had all the tools to out-box Bowe, but he fought to Bowe's strengths in two of their fights.
If Holyfield had respected Bowe like he respected Tyson I dont think he would have ever lost to him.

With Lewis, I think Holyfield actually had a few stylistic problems in front of him. Ironically, I dont think he'd ever lose to Lewis as bad as he lost to Bowe, because Lewis makes him think and box, and Lewis is cautious.

Holyfield would never look great against Lewis, but he could have outboxed Bowe rather easily if he didn't have such a macho mentality. The first Holyfield-Bowe fight you can see Holyfield boxes him well for a couple of rounds then just thinks, "Ah, to hell with it, lets' fight ! I'm gonna knock you out or make you quit, sucker!" but Bowe proved tougher than that.

[PATSYS]

I strongly disagree with the little reasoning you provided. Ring intelligence? Holyfield may have had a temper problem in the ring at times - but he was a brilliant tactician and one of the cleverests ever. Lewis at best could break even with him here. Skills? I don't think Lewis had better boxing skills than Holyfield. Obviously it is ridiculous to judge "Lewis" without his awesome power, but if you want to zone in on skill or boxing ability alone - see that Lewis had a tougher time against Mercer when his power wasn't a factor whereas the lighter handed Holyfield beat Mercer for convincingly with boxing skills. Size difference? Holy made up for it with his speed, strategy, etc.

"Ex-cruiserweight"? If that was the case then why was the second fight so competitive when Holyfield was clearly much past his best than Lennox? Can you refute my reasoning in the first post and tell me where I'm going wrong with the idea of improvements?

I never said Lewis's skills was better than Holyfield.

I said the combination of size, skills, ring intelligence of Lewis is too much for Holy to overcome. It is the total of those qualities, not individually.

The 2nd fight may have been close, but don't ever think that that was the best Lewis ever. :nono

Lewis had problems with Mercer but so what? Everybody had problems with anybody at times. Ali had with Jones, Holyfield with Moorer, Holmes with Wihterspoon, etc.

Fact is that Lewis beat Holyfield 2X, 1 clearly and the other one very very clearly. Was Holyfield at his best? Maybe not, but so was Lewis.

Was Holyfield thought to be the universally recognized HW champ at that time? Did Holyfield just beat Tyson and Moorer at that time? Was Holyfield considered good in those times? The answer to all these questions is a resounding YES.

But of course, since Lewis made him look bad, Holyfield must have been close to shot back in those days...:-(

[Brickhaus]

Prime for prime, Lewis was still 4 inches taller, had longer reach, was about 40 lbs heavier and worked off the end of a jab that effectively kept smaller guys outside. Of course Lewis wins. In 1993, when Holy was prime and Lewis was more raw, Holy wins easily.

[Jazzo]

Only a superstitious American would vote for Holyfield.

[1-Ton]

Prime Holy outworks Lewis to win a close UD.

[Zakman]

A rapidly declining past-his-prime Holyfield arguably beat Lewis in their second fight - a prime Holyfield would outwork Lewis and maybe even get to that suspect chin late and TKO him.

[RUSKULL]

Lewis, and I don't think it's even that close.

[markclow]

To be honest Lewis has never even been extended that much by Holyfield.

VK gave Lewis far more of a fight than Holyfield ever could.

Could you imagine Holyfield beating the VK that Lewis fought?

No - me neither.

[Max Molyneux]

Lewis would beat anyone stopped by Riddick Bowe.

[PATSYS]

Holyfield's power is not enough to KO lewis even if it lands right on the button.

[KO Boxing]

As much of a cop out it is, I voted not sure. I'd certainly favour Lewis, although you can never count out Holyfield... Especially a prime Holyfield!

[Bigcat]

Holyfield took too many unnecessary shots on occasion and that be the flaw that would leave him in second place in this argument..

Lennox on his best day would have a too varied arsenal for the technically brilliant Holyfield...........

Lewis would just have too much for Evander..

No disgrace at all.

[Boinko]

Lewis at his best beats Holy virtually every time. I wouldn't say "absolutely" every time as Evander was a tough, headstrong fighter who could rise to the occasion.
But, ultimately he was a smaller heavyweight and a prime Lewis would be just too big and strong for Evander and that jab would pick him apart all night long.

[hobgoblin]

I never said Lewis's skills was better than Holyfield.

I said the combination of size, skills, ring intelligence of Lewis is too much for Holy to overcome. It is the total of those qualities, not individually.

Fair enough.

Lewis had problems with Mercer but so what? Everybody had problems with anybody at times. Ali had with Jones, Holyfield with Moorer, Holmes with Wihterspoon, etc.

I wasn't trying to make that crap argument that if so and so gave Lewis trouble, what would Holy do? I misunderstood your first point and tried to point out that his skills individually were not better than Holy's. Nevermind this.

Fact is that Lewis beat Holyfield 2X, 1 clearly and the other one very very clearly. Was Holyfield at his best? Maybe not, but so was Lewis.

So go ahead and explain to my how Lennox would improve "at his best". I see TREMENDOUS amount of improvement for Holy - not so much for Lennox. Credit must be given to Lewis for being almost always consistent and on top and this is why it's tough to narrow down his prime. However, many agree that 2001 rematch with Rahman had the best Lewis ever and that a 1999 version would be very close to it. Some deny the 1993 as best version since he was a bit green. Explain to me how he'd improve to overcome Holy's enhanced work rate, speed, stamina, etc.

Was Holyfield thought to be the universally recognized HW champ at that time? Did Holyfield just beat Tyson and Moorer at that time? Was Holyfield considered good in those times? The answer to all these questions is a resounding YES.

But of course, since Lewis made him look bad, Holyfield must have been close to shot back in those days...:-(

It means that he was still pretty good - but it doesn't mean that he was at his best as the ATG that the was! I didn't say he was shot - he was CLEARLY past his best and seeing his MANY WARS, seeing that a speedy fighter who relied on speed & reflexes was now 37, easily comparing the 1993 version side by side - one can see that Holy was overthehill.

[Martini643]

lewis by clear UD

[brooklyn1550]

Lennox Lewis by UD

[Thread Stealer]

I meant to vote for Lewis, but I accidentally voted for Evander. Lewis is winning by a landslide anyway.

Holyfield's best was probably at cruiser, but anyway, the best HW Holyfield I still would make an underdog against the best Lewis.

[hobgoblin]

Man, I wish this match up could actually happen in the future. I would make so much money! This is one of those classical cases where the popular opinion is based on whim (i.e. Tyson vs Holy) and gets proven wrong.

For those who say Holy is a cruiser - doesn't his ability to survive an explosive Mike Tyson a powerful, heavy, strong George Foreman or ability to beat Riddick Bowe (same dimensions of Lennox) prove that he is just more than a "blown up cruiser"? Someone who was that successful shouldn't be questioned as legit HW.

[Shotgun]

Lewis for sure. See the only reason the second fight was close was because Lewis got screwed and thought he had to brawl more to impress the judges which played into Holyfield's hands and made the fight closer than it should have been. He still won though

A prime Lewis fighting smart, utilizing his jab and movement combined with the well timed uppercut and right hand, outboxes any version of Holyfield for a decision.

When people use the second Holy fight as evidence, it doesn't mean a whole lot. You have to understand the mindframe Lewis was in and the circumstances surrounding the fight. In everyone's eyes except the Three Blind Mice with scorecards, he dominated Holyfield and made him look like an amateur. A combination of arrogance (from how easily he beat Holyfield the first time) and frustration (from getting robbed by the judges) is the only reason the fight was closer than the first because Lewis thought he had to (and thought he easily could) beat Holyfield at Holy's own game, which he did. It just made the fight closer than it needed to be. But it wasn't as close as Holy supporters make it out to be. I've yet to find one single Holyfield supporter claiming he won actually say which of the 7 rounds he took to win the fight, and believe me I've asked many times:D

[Dostoevsky]

Holyfield always had trouble with bigger men like Riddick Bowe, Lennox Lewis was twice as talented as Bowe and also a bit bigger.
Lewis would keep Holyfield at the end of his jab and smash Holyfield with right hands, whenever Holyfield got close to Lewis, Lewis would just clinch Evander and frustrate him also at the same time, wearing him down.

Lewis hit harder than Bowe, and Bowe knocked Evander silly in two of their fights.
I fully expect a prime Lewis to stop Holyfield in the later rounds due to TKO.

[Vanboxingfan]

Lewis for sure. See the only reason the second fight was close was because Lewis got screwed and thought he had to brawl more to impress the judges which played into Holyfield's hands and made the fight closer than it should have been. He still won though

A prime Lewis fighting smart, utilizing his jab and movement combined with the well timed uppercut and right hand, outboxes any version of Holyfield for a decision.

When people use the second Holy fight as evidence, it doesn't mean a whole lot. You have to understand the mindframe Lewis was in and the circumstances surrounding the fight. In everyone's eyes except the Three Blind Mice with scorecards, he dominated Holyfield and made him look like an amateur. A combination of arrogance (from how easily he beat Holyfield the first time) and frustration (from getting robbed by the judges) is the only reason the fight was closer than the first because Lewis thought he had to (and thought he easily could) beat Holyfield at Holy's own game, which he did. It just made the fight closer than it needed to be. But it wasn't as close as Holy supporters make it out to be. I've yet to find one single Holyfield supporter claiming he won actually say which of the 7 rounds he took to win the fight, and believe me I've asked many times:D

Excellent post. I've asked the same questions many times too.

[Vanboxingfan]

Man, I wish this match up could actually happen in the future. I would make so much money! This is one of those classical cases where the popular opinion is based on whim (i.e. Tyson vs Holy) and gets proven wrong.

For those who say Holy is a cruiser - doesn't his ability to survive an explosive Mike Tyson a powerful, heavy, strong George Foreman or ability to beat Riddick Bowe (same dimensions of Lennox) prove that he is just more than a "blown up cruiser"? Someone who was that successful shouldn't be questioned as legit HW.

Two comments.

One is I don't thnk the popular opinion is based on a whim at all. I just think the majority of posters who have saw both fighters fight, believe Lewis would win. I'm one of those posters and I've been watching boxing for about 30 years.

But I do agree that Holyfield is a legit heavyweight for the reasons you pointed out. And if pressed, I will even admit that Holyfield had both a better career and is a better p4p fighter than Lewis.

He's just not a better heavyweight, given all of Lewis' attributes.

[Bazooka]

I think a Prime Holyfield vs a Prime Lewis is a good fight some what of a chess match in spots where Lewis boxes and uses his jab, But Holyfield will get inside of that jab and make it a dog fight on the inside, I think its a close fight until the championship rounds of which Evander will be in high gear and more than likely stop Lewis

[Optimist]

Lewis was an eqsuisite boxer. He would beat a best Holyfield on a big night. He had the temprement, skills, size and trainer (at his best - MS) to win.
The question is...

Where does Lewis rank in HW all time list - I go no.9.

[anut]

evander holyfield..........lennox is lucky to have fought a 37 yr old holy who fought in spurts..........93 version of holy would beat 1999 version of lennox......by tko or on points:smoke

[Shamrock]

If they fight 10 out of 10, Lewis beats Holyfield every single time.

By huge margin in 3 of those fights, and the rest of the 7 fight by close boring UD or could be MD/SD.

But Holyfield, as great as he is, will never solve the problem that is called Lennox. The combination of size, skills and ring intelligence is just too much to overcome for the ex-cruiserweight.

Oh fuck, what a joke this post is :patsch :lol: rubbish!

[Jennifer Love Hewitt]

I don't see how Holyfield wins.
Holyfield likes to rumble, Lewis can rumble when needed, but against Holyfield, Lewis would keep the smaller man on the end of his jab. If Holy did get in rumbling range, he would find himself wraped up, leaned on and uppercutted by one of the most powerful, 6'5 245lbers ever.
A younger Holyfield would definately try to press the action more, resulting in him getting jabbed at more, leaned on more, and uppercutted more. Holy might even get dropped like he did vs that bum Riddick.
Lewis wins in pretty much the same fashion that he did when they fought.

[Zakman]

Jeez, Lewis is ridiculously overrated on this site! A prime Holyfield would pressure, pressure, pressure him, and probably take advantage of his shaky whiskers and score a late TKO. If a past-prime Evander could arguably do enough to win their second fight - quite a few ringside journalists scored for him - a prime Evander would win much more clearly.

[Jennifer Love Hewitt]

He didn't do enough to arugably win thier second fight.
Someone PLEASE come up with a reasonable score card that shows how Holy won Lewis-Holy 2.

A prime Holyfield was a cruiser weight. Heavyweight Holyfield went the distance with 40+ year old geezers, couldn't take advatage opf Moorer's shaky chin in their first fight. He lost 2 out of 3 with some chump named Bowe.
Of course, Holyfield put on some great performaces as well. His win over the still formidable Iron Mike proved that he could push around wrestle and headbut a smaller man.
It's a style thing, Lewis is big, he's tactal, and he's helluva strong. If it was so easy to beat him, more people would have done it. Pressure alone is not going to outdo Lennox Lewis. Lewis had an amazimg ability to make people fight his fight. That's the mark of a great ring general.
Holyfield had grit and courage, and tenacity, but I don't see Lewis falling for that, I don't see Holy being able to draw Lewis off his game plan.

[Zakman]

Holyfield had grit and courage, and tenacity, but I don't see Lewis falling for that, I don't see Holy being able to draw Lewis off his game plan.

Holyfield made a career at HW out fighting, and beating, bigger guys. You might think much of Bowe, but that's not the way he was viewed by knowlegable observers back in the early 90s, trust me. Most thought that the Bowe was the MOST talented of the four - and make no mistake about it, back then he was lumped right in with those guys. At his peak, Bowe was a formitable fighter And Holyfield outworked and beat him when he was in the heart of his prime, and fought competively with him on two other occassions.

He also took on other larger fighters - you may deride Foreman, but there is a reason he's called Big George. And Holyfield handled him. Dokes wasn't exactly small - Holyfield beat him up and knocked him out. Lewis certainly would have had the size advantage, but Holyfield proved again and again that he could overcome these disadvantages.

And what about Lewis's flaws - and I'm not just talking about his chin, either. Lewis had a tendency to coast a bit in some fights - particularly where he had a size advantage and would attempt to keep the other guy away simply by jabbing. Holyfield could take advantage of that with his superior workrate and tenacity - work his way inside and tee off. Lewis also - particularly before Manny got ahold of him - didn't have the greatest defense, or footwork. If this fight were to happen in the early 90s, I'd give Evander an even bigger advantage, because of that.

People often look, I think, at some of Lewis's better performances and think simply because he beat those guys impressively, he'd beat anybody. Who on his resume is really the equal of a PRIME Evander Holyfield??

[hobgoblin]

He didn't do enough to arugably win thier second fight.
Someone PLEASE come up with a reasonable score card that shows how Holy won Lewis-Holy 2.

A prime Holyfield was a cruiser weight. Heavyweight Holyfield went the distance with 40+ year old geezers, couldn't take advatage opf Moorer's shaky chin in their first fight. He lost 2 out of 3 with some chump named Bowe.
Of course, Holyfield put on some great performaces as well. His win over the still formidable Iron Mike proved that he could push around wrestle and headbut a smaller man.
It's a style thing, Lewis is big, he's tactal, and he's helluva strong. If it was so easy to beat him, more people would have done it. Pressure alone is not going to outdo Lennox Lewis. Lewis had an amazimg ability to make people fight his fight. That's the mark of a great ring general.
Holyfield had grit and courage, and tenacity, but I don't see Lewis falling for that, I don't see Holy being able to draw Lewis off his game plan.

This was an excessively biased post that distorts the more reliable analysis i.e. you talk about Holyfield bullying the smaller man in Mike Tyson but fail to point out that anyone able to withstand the early attack of Tyson is a proven heavyweight. That same Mike Tyson would have destroyed Michael Spinks (probably in 91s or less lol) or any fighter that wasn't a true hw. I'm confident you understand all this and that you're just toying around.

Lewis make people fight his fight? Not entirely true. He could do it with someone like Tua or a smaller Morrison but not someone as capable as Evander Holyfied. It'd be Holy's speed, boxing skills, combinations, movement vs Lewis' speed, boxing skills, size, movement - pretty even IMO, especially when Lennox's power is taken out of the equation with a prime, spirited warrior like Evander Holyfield. Lewis could assert his ring generalship against typical contenders (a very good feat) - but against a wily ATG like Commander Vander? Not so sure.

I don't see how Holyfield wins.
Holyfield likes to rumble, Lewis can rumble when needed, but against Holyfield, Lewis would keep the smaller man on the end of his jab. If Holy did get in rumbling range, he would find himself wraped up, leaned on and uppercutted by one of the most powerful, 6'5 245lbers ever.
A younger Holyfield would definately try to press the action more, resulting in him getting jabbed at more, leaned on more, and uppercutted more. Holy might even get dropped like he did vs that bum Riddick.
Lewis wins in pretty much the same fashion that he did when they fought.

The increased work rate & speed is certainly going to give Lewis more problems. Furthermore, Lewis' jab may look good against guys like Tua or washed up Tyson - but it isn't the jab of Ali to land so easily on a defensive tactician like Holyfield who will time the jab and counter as he did with Mercer (whose jab wasn't so far off from Lewis' as the jabbing contest was about even).

[Shotgun]

Still waiting for a Holy supporter to tell me which 7 rounds Holyfield "arguably" won to "arguably" win the second fight :yep

[Shotgun]

It'd be Holy's speed, boxing skills, combinations, movement vs Lewis' speed, boxing skills, size, movement - pretty even IMO, especially when Lennox's power is taken out of the equation with a prime, spirited warrior like Evander Holyfield. Lewis could assert his ring generalship against typical contenders (a very good feat) - but against a wily ATG like Commander Vander? Not so sure.
You can't just conveniently remove Lewis's power from the equation. Unless you want to take Holyfield's speed and combos out of the combination as they're offset by Lewis's jab and defense.

If Riddick Bowe and Michael Moorer could outbox "prime" Holyfield then Lewis surely could too

And please don't tell me you just called Holyfield a defensive tactician

[BobDigi5060]

Who on his resume is really the equal of a PRIME Evander Holyfield??

Good question.

This is a tossup and no shame in thinking a good big man beats a good small man but I seriously would not sleep on a prime real deal. I don't think Lewis fought anybody comparible to what a prime Holy would be.

[hobgoblin]

You can't just conveniently remove Lewis's power from the equation. Unless you want to take Holyfield's speed and combos out of the combination as they're offset by Lewis's jab and defense.

If Riddick Bowe and Michael Moorer could outbox "prime" Holyfield then Lewis surely could too

And please don't tell me you just called Holyfield a defensive tactician

Of course Lennox's power will keep Holy on the look out and even shake him a few times. However, because Holy has a great chin + heart (nevermind his defense) that power will not have nearly the same effect as it would on someone like, say Tommy Morrison. Remember Tyson? He landed some fast, powerful, explosive punches that rocked Holy but Holy handled them well and punches that would have shattered lesser men were made to !look! ordinary (they weren't). Ray Mercer dealt with Lewis' power (which btw ranks among the best) so well that its effect was minimized. The Tyson fight is a great example of what I'm talking about.

Riddick Bowe outboxed Holy on the inside where he is known to be one of the best. Not your traditional midrange boxing - which is what would happen with Lennox.

Definitely I call Holyfield a defensive tactician. Look at his brilliance against the formidable offensive artillery of Mike Tyson! Blocked so many of Tyson's left hooks and uppercuts with his defensive maneuver. You can say that Tyson was being predictable or foolish but with his blinding speed - it is still a very difficult task.

[hobgoblin]

Still waiting for a Holy supporter to tell me which 7 rounds Holyfield "arguably" won to "arguably" win the second fight :yep

I was not raising this irrelevant issue. Lewis won the second fight clearly but competitively. However, beating a 1999 Holy (over half a dozen wars, a fighter who relied on speed & reflexes is now 37 etc) is far from beating a prime Holyfield. Lewis fans always fail to accept this.

[paulfv]

I thought Holyfield squeaked-out the second fight and he got jobbed on the cards, much as Lewis did the first fight.

Both prime, I think Holyfield outworks and outwills (which shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone) Lewis to take a UD.

Even though Lewis scared Bowe, I think style-wise Bowe was tougher for Holyfield than Lewis was. Bowe would stand and trade with Holyfield, which was not Lewis' strategy or his wont. Because of Lewis' shaky chin and his respect for Holyfield's chin, he was not inclined to get into extended exchanges with Holyfield.

It's a classic case of "Fighter A > Fighter B," and "Fighter B > Fighter C," but "Fighter A is not > Fighter C." "A" is Lewis, "B" is Bowe, and "C" is Holyfield.

Bowe beat Holyfield twice (although Holyfield had his supposed heart issue in the second fight), and it is well-known that Bowe didn't want to face Lewis, but, IMO, prime Holyfield > prime Lewis, based on style, physical tools (chins), and fighting disposition (mixing-it-up vs more reluctant).
-----------------

- Lewis was a very good HW champion, in many people's top-10 all-time.

- Holyfield is the greatest crusierweight ever, and a 4-time HW champion.

He is a legendary figure in the sport, one of the main reasons being because
of his incredible will to win. This is what separates him from Lewis, despite
Lewis' superior size and strength. That's no shame to Lewis, who is himself
extremely competitive -- almost no one in the history of the sport possessesd
the will to win that Holyfield did.

[Vanboxingfan]

I personally don't think that the will to win, replaces the ability to win. I don't think many fighters go into a fight expecting to loose, but it's their respective abilities that determine the outcome. And on this basis, I would predict a Lewis victory.

[hobgoblin]

I personally don't think that the will to win, replaces the ability to win.

I agree; Frazier vs Foreman shows this idea. However, Holyfield had the ABILITY - (not one dimensional fighting style like Frazier but adaptable boxing) to win. His speed & skills & workrate certainly made him competitive against the bigger Lewis. Foreman said Holy hit with the same power as Ali (a legit hw with underrated power) and remember that Holy was one of the best conditioned hw in the past 20 years - he doesn't have excess fat like today's fighters who have lots of extra weight as a result. Holy really wasn't so small; 6'2" 77" reach. That's my opinion - of course yours can be different and perfectly understandable. Would have loved to see a fight with prime Holy.

[bigG]

You can't just conveniently remove Lewis's power from the equation. Unless you want to take Holyfield's speed and combos out of the combination as they're offset by Lewis's jab and defense.

If Riddick Bowe and Michael Moorer could outbox "prime" Holyfield then Lewis surely could too

And please don't tell me you just called Holyfield a defensive tactician


i think you can remove lewis power from the equation....in his prime, holyfields chin was up there with ray mercer, and lewis couldnt shake him. lewis couldnt faze the older version of holyfield....im no lewis hater, i didnt appreciate him when he was around, but sure can see his acheivments nowdays....a prime holyfield gives lewis fits.....if a one speed come forward brawler like mercer could give a prime lewis hell, holyfield, with his superior workrate, greater speed and greater accuracy, would manage to turn the fight into a dog fight and take over in teh mid to late rounds with a u/d...i actually think lewis chin was ok to above average, so i doubt the relatively light hitting holyfield would ko him, but for me, prime for prime, holyfield wins an exciting but clear decision...

[PATSYS]

Fair enough. So go ahead and explain to my how Lennox would improve "at his best". I see TREMENDOUS amount of improvement for Holy - not so much for Lennox. Credit must be given to Lewis for being almost always consistent and on top and this is why it's tough to narrow down his prime. However, many agree that 2001 rematch with Rahman had the best Lewis ever and that a 1999 version would be very close to it. Some deny the 1993 as best version since he was a bit green. Explain to me how he'd improve to overcome Holy's enhanced work rate, speed, stamina, etc.

What tremendous amount of improvement for Holy?? That is crap. Many people thought Holy back in 96 was much better than the prime Holy in so many ways. He had better chin, he punches harder, better pacing and fights more intelligent. I would bet the 96 Holyfield had higher chances of beating Mike Tyson than the prime version.

The Holyfield in 93 would have prolly been koed by the Lewis of 98.

Prime HOlyfield's workrate, speed and stamina could not overcome Bowe's size. And Bowe, although similar to Lewis in size, fights small which means he is giving up some of his size advantage. Lewis wouldn't make that mistake.

It means that he was still pretty good - but it doesn't mean that he was at his best as the ATG that the was! I didn't say he was shot - he was CLEARLY past his best and seeing his MANY WARS, seeing that a speedy fighter who relied on speed & reflexes was now 37, easily comparing the 1993 version side by side - one can see that Holy was overthehill.

Comparing side by side? Was he fighting the same guy for you to make a fair comparison? Just because he beat (barely) a fat out of shape Bowe in 93 whereas he lost to Lewis in 98 doesn't he was much better back then.

Don't be fooled by Lewis' performance in the rematch. Lewis usually just does enough to win rounds. Just because Holyfield made it a bit closer in the rematch doesn't mean Lewis remains static. If he was facing a prime Holyfield, he would rise to the occassion, just like he did against so many fighters who were perceived to be a high threat to him. He did it when he fought Holy (1st time), Rahman (rematch), Tua, Ruddock, Golota, Briggs, Morrison, Tyson, etc.

When Lewis thought that the fighter has small chance of beating him , he becomes complacent e.g. Vitali, Holyfield (rematch), Rahman (1st fight), etc.

[PATSYS]

Man, I wish this match up could actually happen in the future. I would make so much money! This is one of those classical cases where the popular opinion is based on whim (i.e. Tyson vs Holy) and gets proven wrong.

For those who say Holy is a cruiser - doesn't his ability to survive an explosive Mike Tyson a powerful, heavy, strong George Foreman or ability to beat Riddick Bowe (same dimensions of Lennox) prove that he is just more than a "blown up cruiser"? Someone who was that successful shouldn't be questioned as legit HW.

Foreman? :lol:

Bowe who although similar in Lewis' size fights on the inside? Bowe who was awefully out of shape but still almost beat HOly?. Bowe who beat Holyfield 2 out of 3 :lol:

Who are you kidding?

[PATSYS]

Lewis for sure. See the only reason the second fight was close was because Lewis got screwed and thought he had to brawl more to impress the judges which played into Holyfield's hands and made the fight closer than it should have been. He still won though

A prime Lewis fighting smart, utilizing his jab and movement combined with the well timed uppercut and right hand, outboxes any version of Holyfield for a decision.

When people use the second Holy fight as evidence, it doesn't mean a whole lot. You have to understand the mindframe Lewis was in and the circumstances surrounding the fight. In everyone's eyes except the Three Blind Mice with scorecards, he dominated Holyfield and made him look like an amateur. A combination of arrogance (from how easily he beat Holyfield the first time) and frustration (from getting robbed by the judges) is the only reason the fight was closer than the first because Lewis thought he had to (and thought he easily could) beat Holyfield at Holy's own game, which he did. It just made the fight closer than it needed to be. But it wasn't as close as Holy supporters make it out to be. I've yet to find one single Holyfield supporter claiming he won actually say which of the 7 rounds he took to win the fight, and believe me I've asked many times:D

Very well said :good

[PATSYS]

Actually I am beginning to change my mind. I say that the 96-98 Holyfield would only lose to Lewis by decision, The prime 208 lbs Holyfield would probabyy lose by KO. His aggressiveness will be to his own detriment.

[Ted Stickles]

I always thought tha a prime Holyfield was better than a prime Lewis because Evanders work rate was far superior

[rochsolloch]

imo lennox in his prime beats every heavyweight in history hes the perfect heavyweight.

[paulfv]

Actually I am beginning to change my mind. I say that the 96-98 Holyfield would only lose to Lewis by decision, The prime 208 lbs Holyfield would probabyy lose by KO. His aggressiveness will be to his own detriment.

Not a chance.


Holyfield took some huge shots from Foreman when they met in 1991. He was stung maybe once or twice, and there is no way on this earth Lennox hits harder than Foreman.

On the flip side, Holyfield had Foreman seriously dazed during the fight, landing something like 19 unanswered punches during one stretch. I believe it goes without saying that Foreman's chin is exponentially superior to Lewis.'

If Lennox was foolish enough to trade with the 208 lbs., 29-year-old Holyfield, he would get hurt and probably dropped. Remember, Holyfield brutally KO'd Adilson Rodriguez and he put Mercer on the canvas (1 knee), which is something Lewis never came close to doing. Holyfield would have stayed in the pocket, took or dodged Lewis' shots, and found LL's glass mandible with his own bombs.

I can't stand Bowe, but he is a much, much better infighter than Lewis and has a far better chin, which is what allowed him to fight Holyfield the way that he did. Bowe also has lost exactly 1 time - to Evander Holyfield. Lewis fought more tenatively against Holyfield because he was wary of Holyfield's ability to take a shot and his own ability to not be able to take a shot. The ENORMOUS shots that Golota hit Bowe with - in both fights - would have definitely KO'd Lewis and his wanting chin. Which is one reason LL jumped on Golota - he didn't want to take those punches because he knew the damage they could do. I don't even remember if Bowe has ever even been off his feet (although I know Holyfield almost had him ready to go in one of their fights), let alone suffered two crushing 1-punch KO/TKO defeats as has Lewis.

Lewis fought as he needed to fight Holyfield - tall and out of harm's way. And it worked (or didn't, as I felt in the second fight) against a 37 year-old, already-beaten-by-Moorer-and-KO'd-by-Bowe Holyfield.

Against a prime, much-faster and fresher Holyfield? No way. He would either get outworked and lose on points or else dropped and possibly stopped. That Holyfield was very explosive, very fast and had KO'd/TKO'd the likes of James Tillis, Buster Douglas, Michael Dokes, Alex Stewart, and Bert Cooper. He made the very rugged Pinklon Thomas quit. He easily stood up to the heavy hands of Stewart, Cooper, and Foreman as well as to the speed of Dokes.

The Holyfield of 1988-1992 or so (26-30 years old) would have beaten any version of Lennox Lewis. Lewis' only chance would have been to drop in a huge right while Holyfield was still cold in the first 2 rounds or so. But for that, Holyfield would have either completely befuddled Lewis with his workrate or else dropped and stopped Lewis as he had with fighters whose chins were superior to Lewis' own.

One of Lewis' greatest assets is he came along/into his own as other guys were fading. This wasn't always his fault, of course, as Tyson ducked him and Bowe ducked him. But the versions of Tyson and Holyfield he fought (esp. Tyson) weren't anything close to what those fighters had been at their peaks.

Prime Lewis would have to fight an almost perfect fight just to last 12 rounds with Tyson, let alone beat him. As Frank Bruno has said "I would rather fight Lennox Lewis once a week than fight Tyson once a year." Under no circumstances can I imagine a prime Tyson losing to Lewis. None. And 8/10 times, minimum, Tyson would destroy Lewis with a brutal KO. His long arms and tenative style were absolutely made-to-order for Mike Tyson.

Lewis was a very large man and he developed his jab-and-grab under Manny at just the right time, later in his career when other big-time fighters were either faded or gone. He was a worthy champion, and he took on almost all challengers. He deserves respect and admiration.

But Prime Tyson and Prime Holyfield are two of the greatest fighters the sport has ever seen. Lewis is not only not in the same sentence with those two, he's not in the same paragraph. Prime Tyson would have made Rahman-Lewis I and McCall-Lewis I look pathetic by comparison to what he would have done to Lennox. And although Lewis has a huge advantage in size over Holyfield, he never would have been able to keep up with Holyfield's workrate, dent his chin, or been fearless enough to try to stand and trade with Evander. If he had stopped to repeatedly exchange with Evander, given LL's shaky beard and Evander's list of knockdowns/KO's, he almost certainly would have been dropped repeatedly and likely stopped.

[paulfv]

TO PAUL FV

You completely ignore Vander's inconsistency. Look at his run as champ (linear). Its not that great my friend! After taking the title of Buster he faces: Foreman, Cooper Holmes then faces a genuine top challenger in Bowe....ooops. A defeat. He recaptures against Bowe, and then....ooops a deafeat in his first defence against Moorer! So the prime Vander can lose to Bowe and Moorer but prime Lennox Lewis has "Not a chance". That is bias of the highest order. I pick prime Lewis to take any version of Holy, but I am not so miopic to give Holy NO chance. It is a close call, 2 great HWs and to give either No chance is plain daft.


Moorer was a southpaw that befuddled Holyfield and I have already discussed twice, at length, why Bowe matched up better with Holyfield than did Lewis. Totally different styles.

And again, a person's peak physical age is generally considered between 28-32 years old. Evander was at the tail end of that when he first fought Bowe and Moorer.

Unlike Lewis, Evander wasn't getting TKO'd by guys who cry in the ring during his peak years. And though I despise Bowe, I recognize the incredible amount of talent which he had, far superior to Lewis' own. If Bowe actually was focused and wasn't ruined by Golota, who knows. But again, Bowe only lost once in like 45 fights, and he was never stopped. Holyfield hurt Bowe badly in one of the fights, the fight which Evander was knocked out in. There is no possible way that that version (and that was when he was like 33) of EH doesn't beat any version of Lewis, including the 'jab-and-grab' Lewis. Evander would have been a blur to Lennox.

[FiveStoneFists]

Holyfield's first run as champion was not that impressive. He was criticised for fighting Foreman, Holmes and Cooper (who dropped him). Holmes and Foreman were old. Pre-title his opposition was not that impressive either, the Dokes Holyfield fought was over the hill and he was not that great to begin with.

Bowe built his reputation off of Holyfield. Bowe did nor beat anyone of significance besides Holyfield. Moorer built his reputation off of Holyfield too (at heavyweight). Holyfield just started getting (real) respect when he beat Tyson to the backdrop of Bowe's retirement and thrashings at the hand of Golota.

Holyfield was never the US hope till after he beat Tyson. Bowe was the man in the eyes of the (US) media, but he failed while the undersized overachiever shocked the world. What made Holyfield great is that he could rise to the ocassion when nobody thought he could. He beat Bowe, and he beat a head-hunting post-prison Tyson.

Imo Holyfield was a better fighter in his second reign rather than the first. He was to light in his first reign, and had less strength. Holyfield misses the main ingredient to beat Lewis, and that is power. Bowe fought up to Holyfield's strengths, and had a porous defense. Foreman was too old and fought in spurts and arches his shots.

How can Holyfield be credited for beating an old Holmes, while Tyson thrashed a younger version and never gets any credit? Bowe lost his title to Holyfield who lost it to Moorer who lost it to Foremen. Moorer regained the title by beating Schultz for the vacant title (as he beat Foreman but was not awarded the decision). And during that time Bowe was still considered the man by many (mainly US).

Bowe was losing to Golota in two brutal beatings, but won through DQs, before opting for retirement. After Lewis' demolished the then boogieman of the division in Golota. Holyfield himself said Lewis was ducked during the early nineties. A prime Holyfield would have a chance against Lewis, but Lewis would always be favoured (even the younger one). I would pick Lewis 8 out of 10 prime for prime.

[JohnThomas1]

Lewis for sure. See the only reason the second fight was close was because Lewis got screwed and thought he had to brawl more to impress the judges which played into Holyfield's hands and made the fight closer than it should have been. He still won though

A prime Lewis fighting smart, utilizing his jab and movement combined with the well timed uppercut and right hand, outboxes any version of Holyfield for a decision.

When people use the second Holy fight as evidence, it doesn't mean a whole lot. You have to understand the mindframe Lewis was in and the circumstances surrounding the fight. In everyone's eyes except the Three Blind Mice with scorecards, he dominated Holyfield and made him look like an amateur. A combination of arrogance (from how easily he beat Holyfield the first time) and frustration (from getting robbed by the judges) is the only reason the fight was closer than the first because Lewis thought he had to (and thought he easily could) beat Holyfield at Holy's own game, which he did. It just made the fight closer than it needed to be. But it wasn't as close as Holy supporters make it out to be. I've yet to find one single Holyfield supporter claiming he won actually say which of the 7 rounds he took to win the fight, and believe me I've asked many times:D

:good

[Drexl]

It's a landslide!

Lennox by almost 3 votes to 1. :yep

That's a huge margin when you consider the difference in popularity.

[Zakman]

Just further indication of how utterly overrated Lewis is on this site, and how underrated Holyfield is! :nod

[Drexl]

Just further indication of how utterly overrated Lewis is on this site, and how underrated Holyfield is! :nod

I wondered how long it would take for you to get in here with your excuses.

:yep

[Zakman]

Yeah, its everyone else who is crazy Zak? ;)

The "common wisdom" is often distorted by a "group-think" mentality, and these understandings also shift over time.

I also suspect that if Holyfield wins another belt at this advanced age - which as you guys might imagine I am BIGTIME rooting for - there will be some reevaluation of his historical status, and perhaps he will start to get the credit he deserves as the greatest HW of his era!!!:happy

[PATSYS]

It's a landslide!

Lennox by almost 3 votes to 1. :yep

That's a huge margin when you consider the difference in popularity.

And the number of American posters compared to brits in here :D

[Vanboxingfan]

Moorer was a southpaw that befuddled Holyfield and I have already discussed twice, at length, why Bowe matched up better with Holyfield than did Lewis. Totally different styles.

And again, a person's peak physical age is generally considered between 28-32 years old. Evander was at the tail end of that when he first fought Bowe and Moorer.

Unlike Lewis, Evander wasn't getting TKO'd by guys who cry in the ring during his peak years. And though I despise Bowe, I recognize the incredible amount of talent which he had, far superior to Lewis' own. If Bowe actually was focused and wasn't ruined by Golota, who knows. But again, Bowe only lost once in like 45 fights, and he was never stopped. Holyfield hurt Bowe badly in one of the fights, the fight which Evander was knocked out in. There is no possible way that that version (and that was when he was like 33) of EH doesn't beat any version of Lewis, including the 'jab-and-grab' Lewis. Evander would have been a blur to Lennox.


To suggest Bowe had more talent that Lewis is laughable. Firstly they met in the olympics an fought for a gold metal. My guess it Bowe would have very much liked to have won that fight. He lost. Then in their professional careers Bowe clearly ducked Lewis when he had the chance to fight him. I don't usually make those kind of accusations because more often than not other factors, such as money, enter into the equation, but in this case it was clearly the case. Then of course you have their respective records which speak for themselves. The Golota bouts might be a fair comparison since he's a common opponent.

[streetsaresafer]

I take Holyfield prime v. prime due to his increased workrate.

Early 90s heavyweight era was damn good, but I think it could have been better than the 70s golden age had just 2 things been different
1. Tyson had not gone to jail (probably should have been acquitted)
2. and Bowe was willing to fight Lewis
We would have really gotten a chance to see who the best was
These are some of the fights that could have happened
91 Tyson/Holyfield
92 Holy/Bowe (same as before)
93 Bowe/Lewis
93 Bowe/Holy II (same as before)
94 Holy/Lewis
94 Tyson/Bowe
95 Tyson/Lewis
95 Holy/Tyson II
95 Bowe/Lewis II
Amazing what could have been

[ChrisPontius]

The "common wisdom" is often distorted by a "group-think" mentality, and these understandings also shift over time.

I also suspect that if Holyfield wins another belt at this advanced age - which as you guys might imagine I am BIGTIME rooting for - there will be some reevaluation of his historical status, and perhaps he will start to get the credit he deserves as the greatest HW of his era!!!:happy

You do realise that if Holyfield wins another belt, that

a) Lewis' wins over Holyfield become even more significant
b) It adds nothing to Holyfield being the man in the 90's or not

Right?

[bigG]

tyson got no credit for beating holmes cos holmes had been innactive for a long period..there was one glorious spurt in that fight, when larry says to his corner, big round baby, big round, and goes out, gets up on his toes and looks like the larry of old, shooting out his jab..before gettin starched..this brief freeze frame really made me think..what if....a prime holmes vs tyson...i think larry woulda handled mikey relatively easily...dare i say, the holmes that holy beat was older for sure, but he was a better reincarnation than the one mike fought.....i still say prime holyfield is a handful for any h/w champ....as is prime lewis.....instead of bitchin about tyson/holyfield/lewis/bowe why dont we just give thanks that, for a brief period, we had a superb h/w division full of talent...any of these four fighters, yes, including bowe, would compete with any h/w champ in history...not win mind, but be competitive....i still take 'vander prime over lewis prime..but a tough fight for sure...

[Boinko]

Zakman
The "common wisdom" is often distorted by a "group-think" mentality, and these understandings also shift over time.

Of course, if Holyfield does someday start to be perceived as a better heavyweight than Lewis how do you know that won't just be an example of distorted "group think" wisdom as well, arising from revisionists like yourself who absolutely can't handle the possibility that Lewis might have been a better heavyweight than Evander.
Your constant claims that Lewis' high ranking (often above Holyfield) is some sort of anomoly that will be corrected over time when people start to think more clearly is insulting to knowledgable fans and is the height of arrogance.

I respect fan's opinions who rank Evander above Lewis even though I don't agree with them. But, I'm not arrogant enough to rant about how such fans are delusional, misguided, or victims of "distorted group think."
Show some respect for the opinions of you fellow forum members. I know you find the idea that Lewis would get ranked about Holyfield as totally unbearable, but the ESB fans have spoken in this thread.

[bigG]

its strange...i think vander rates higher as a fighter..ie prime for prime, he beats lewis...but lewis is probaly higher on the atg list on acheivments/opposition...

[Vanboxingfan]

its strange...i think vander rates higher as a fighter..ie prime for prime, he beats lewis...but lewis is probaly higher on the atg list on acheivments/opposition...

I actually think the opposite is true. I think h2h, Lewis wins. In heavyweight achievements, Lewis also wins. In career achievements, counting Holyfields stint at Cruiser, he wins. He also wins ins the p4p department between the two. Obviously they are two great fighters.

[JAM Killer]

I will give it to Lennox. By a hair.

[achillesthegreat]

Lewis is simply a better boxer. He is a more complete boxer puncher who is far more intelligent.

[bigG]

i agree..a better BOXER...not a better FIGHTER tho...

[Mind Reader]

I gotta go with Lewis, but a really close fight.

[Alo2006]

A rapidly declining past-his-prime Holyfield arguably beat Lewis in their second fight - a prime Holyfield would outwork Lewis and maybe even get to that suspect chin late and TKO him.


I agree.

[hobgoblin]

What tremendous amount of improvement for Holy?? That is crap. Many people thought Holy back in 96 was much better than the prime Holy in so many ways. He had better chin, he punches harder, better pacing and fights more intelligent. I would bet the 96 Holyfield had higher chances of beating Mike Tyson than the prime version.

His chin was always very good. Not significantly better in 1996, it was more about him rising to the occasion and taking Tyson very seriously. Punches harder? Slightly at best - not a significant point here. Better pacing & more intelligent? No way. He didn't need to pace himself in 1991 - he had the best stamina out of anyone and in terms of intelligence - he was always a very tactical fighter (look at how he times against Douglas a great counter or how he schools Tyson) - he made a mistake with Bowe thanks to his temper but you can't generalize that one mistake. 1990-1991 Holyfield (desperate for the title) was better than 1996 Holyfield no doubt - and he was especially better for Lewis specifically sort of like the way some say 1974 Ali was better than 1964 Ali against Foreman.

Speaking of Foreman...you can't laugh at the OLD version. I'll agree that Lennox has the stylistic advantage to make OLD Foreman a laughing matter - but for just about anyone else he was a very dangerous fighter (of course Lewis would have to be clinical). Surely you respect Tyson's knowledge of boxing and ability to assess other fighters. He said that Old Foreman was a lot better than perceived. At the very least - he was NOT a joke (the Cooney fights, Moorer fights, and even Holyfield fights in no way says he's anything in the league to fight Lewis - but it does mean you should respect him).

The Holyfield in 93 would have prolly been koed by the Lewis of 98.

Save for a fight where he had hepatitis, Holy never came close to being stopped - despite facing some of the deadliest punchers. More importantly, he may not have taken Bert Cooper (who was a last second replacement) seriously enough - but just as he did with Tyson - he'd rise to the occasion for Lennox Lewis.

Prime HOlyfield's workrate, speed and stamina could not overcome Bowe's size. And Bowe, although similar to Lewis in size, fights small which means he is giving up some of his size advantage. Lewis wouldn't make that mistake.

Bowe and Lewis are two different fighters for the good and the worse. Bowe was a very talented INFIGHTER and Holy went toe to toe with the bigger man (don't do that with Lewis) rather than move & box as he did with Lewis. Move & box with his speed & skills could have worked with Bowe and it could have worked with Lewis. Make it a pure boxing match against Lewis and try to make Lewis' power a non factor with heart, chin (he did it against Tyson - who was an even more explosive puncher than Lennox if not as consistent & strategic to win like Lewis) so he could do it here too. I disagree with you - I've noticed Lewis fight small too! He did it with Tyson for example (maybe because he knew Tyson of no threat to him) for a great chunk of the fight where he fought midrange (of course he fought from a distance too but not all the time!). In a pure boxing match where Lewis' power goes out of the equation thanks to Holy (so the SUM is artificially replaced by individual parts - we talked about this earlier) than lots of guys were even with Lewis in pure boxing itself despite Lewis' skill & size (it was his power that always made the COLOSSAL difference) - Holy could hold his ground too but win more points by a greater work rate.

[hobgoblin]

i agree..a better BOXER...not a better FIGHTER tho...

Not a better BOXER. Holyfield can take Lewis' power out of the equation as he did with Tyson. Holy's skill + work rate + speed + craftiness > Lewis' skills + size + speed + ring generalship. Lewis always dominated the ring because he never fought a fighter of the caliber of PRIME Holyfield. Lewis the boxer individually, struggled boxing matches with Mercer & Bruno. Hell, in the opening round - even Tyson was getting the better of the jabs till he shot down after eating 2 or 3 big Lewis uppercuts (btw - I gave Lewis round 1 of the fight for landing the meaningful punches). Lewis' power was what made him super special and that added to his size & power really exploited his size & skills and took it to a new level - Holyfield, like Mercer, would nullify that effect.

Lewis who is far more intelligent.

:patsch:

Holyfield was one of the greatest boxing minds. Just because Lewis talks about chess doesn't mean he's some grandmaster :lol:

[Dekkers]

Lewis is simply a better boxer. He is a more complete boxer puncher who is far more intelligent.
That's an important point there were a lot of times Holy fought incredibly stupid fights, the first Bowe fight and the Cooper fight immediately spring to mind, he became a more intelligent fighter as he got older, that offset his age to a degree. Lewis would've had an easier time with the Holy who came into the first fight with Bowe and one-dimensionally threw left hook after left hook, than the older Holy he faced off with.

[hobgoblin]

That's an important point there were a lot of times Holy fought incredibly stupid fights, the first Bowe fight and the Cooper fight immediately spring to mind, he became a more intelligent fighter as he got older, that offset his age to a degree. Lewis would've had an easier time with the Holy who came into the first fight with Bowe and one-dimensionally threw left hook after left hook, than the older Holy he faced off with.

You listed 2. I could say Lewis fought incredibly stupid fights with McCall, Rahman, and Vitali (trading with him was risky!). It is a mistake you made one night - not a general characteristic. Holy obviously did not take Cooper very seriously (he'd rise to the occasion for Lewis or Tyson) and obviously lost his cool with Bowe. He'd be smarter with a fighters of the caliber of Lewis. Like I said, Holy was one of the best boxing minds. He timed his punches very well, he looked for openings, came up with boxing maneuvers, knew how to use his "head" :lol:, no one was "far more intelligent" and certainly not Lewis!

[Dekkers]

You listed 2. I could say Lewis fought incredibly stupid fights with McCall, Rahman, and Vitali (trading with him was risky!). It is a mistake you made one night - not a general characteristic. Holy obviously did not take Cooper very seriously (he'd rise to the occasion for Lewis or Tyson) and obviously lost his cool with Bowe. He'd be smarter with a fighters of the caliber of Lewis. Like I said, Holy was one of the best boxing minds. He timed his punches very well, he looked for openings, came up with boxing maneuvers, knew how to use his "head" :lol:, no one was "far more intelligent" and certainly not Lewis!
Lewis was quite underdone in the physical sense for the fights with Vitali and Rahman (which came at the tail end of his career), the McCall fight was something of a wakeup call for Lewis who wasn't improving at all as a heavyweight at the time (believed his own press clippings).

Holy wasn't anywhere as highly regarded as he is today until the win over Tyson, where he did fight intelligently, his other best win in the Moorer rematch came after this time. Before this though he was a better physical speciman which bailed him out on the occasions he fought stupidly, choosing to trade rather than box. Holy wasn't as smart a boxer in this supposed 'prime' he was in when facing off with Bowe, he became that boxer you talk about with more experience.

That's why an argument exists about when exactly Holy was 'prime'.

[achillesthegreat]

:patsch:

Holyfield was one of the greatest boxing minds. Just because Lewis talks about chess doesn't mean he's some grandmaster :lol:
You're just being silly.

[achillesthegreat]

You listed 2. I could say Lewis fought incredibly stupid fights with McCall, Rahman, and Vitali (trading with him was risky!). It is a mistake you made one night - not a general characteristic. Holy obviously did not take Cooper very seriously (he'd rise to the occasion for Lewis or Tyson) and obviously lost his cool with Bowe. He'd be smarter with a fighters of the caliber of Lewis. Like I said, Holy was one of the best boxing minds. He timed his punches very well, he looked for openings, came up with boxing maneuvers, knew how to use his "head" :lol:, no one was "far more intelligent" and certainly not Lewis!
No one would call the McCall Lewis, Lewis at his best!

The first Rahman fight he was simply out of shape at high altitude. Even still he won every round. He simply wasn't at his best, caught with right hands and eventually one put him away.

Against Vitali he was out of shape but still thought he was facing a quitter who would break. He wasn't prepared enough to box. Turns out what he did was right because he tore Vitalis face up.

Your examples are wrong.

Holy wasn't dumb but he was not as intelligent as Lewis. ALOT of fighters were 'far more intelligent', especially Lewis.

[Drexl]

If Rahman & McCal could knock out Lewis then a prime Holyfield destroys him within 4rds

Hahahahaaaaaa!

Once you bring out the "If X beat him, then Y destroys him" myth, you automatically lose the argument.

:lol:

[DamonD]

...because otherwise, Tommy Morrison would knock out Joe Frazier since Morrison outboxed Foreman...see how much of a nonsense it can be?

How about another one - Moorer beat Holyfield, and therefore must obviously beat Mike Tyson.

[Vanboxingfan]

Holyfield was one of the greatest boxing minds. Just because Lewis talks about chess doesn't mean he's some grandmaster :lol:

I don't know why had the better boxing mind, but I think Lewis had better general ringmanship and was better able to control distance and the pace of the fight than Holyfield. In fact I think that's one of Lewis' strengths that is largely overlooked.

[hobgoblin]

No one would call the McCall Lewis, Lewis at his best!

The first Rahman fight he was simply out of shape at high altitude. Even still he won every round. He simply wasn't at his best, caught with right hands and eventually one put him away.

Against Vitali he was out of shape but still thought he was facing a quitter who would break. He wasn't prepared enough to box. Turns out what he did was right because he tore Vitalis face up.

Your examples are wrong.

Holy wasn't dumb but he was not as intelligent as Lewis. ALOT of fighters were 'far more intelligent', especially Lewis.

Yeah, I wasn't mentioning those fights to say that Lewis lost them out of incompetence or anything like that. Clearly, AT SOME POINT (whether it was preparation or whatever) - he was not thinking very intelligently. He was thinking very foolishly and the end results showed it (except in the Vitali fight :smoke ). He made some mistakes. Those things happened in single, separate, deviated occasions. You can't generalize and say that Lewis was usually careless in his training etc. Same thing with Holy losing his cool with Bowe or not taking Cooper seriously enough.

I was very serious about Lewis & chess though. People overreact to him knowing how to play chess. I also know how to play chess but people don't call me anything special. Sure, for a boxer growing up on the wrong side of the tracks it may be interesting - but WE have yet to see any proof that he is really good at chess to tout him as a chess thinking strategist.

Clearly our opinion of Holyfield are very different. Look at the fight with Mike Tyson. He totally neutralized Mike Tyson's fearsome artillery. That is VERY HARD to do! Holy did it with his clever boxing brain. He blocked almost all uppercuts & left hooks despite the blinding speed at which they were fired at him. Commentators rightfully stated, "great defensive maneuver by Holyfield." With his focus and intelligence - he timed Tyson (this is MUCH easier done than said considering the speed) and countered. That's called fighting smart. Even knew when to use the "head".

Against, Douglas was not the same guy that beat Tyson but Holyfield wasn't going to let Douglas be someone he wasn't with him! With intelligence that unfortunately Tyson never showed, Holy TIMED a great counter right hand that sent the larger Douglas on the canvas (sure this Douglas was not as good - but if Tyson just used that strategy - his physical talents would have rendered it and Douglas would have never won). With Lewis in 1999 - Holy had little in the tank left except his brain. You guys said it yourself - Holy was too small etc. His boxing mind is what made it competitive. Years later when he faced the man that knocked out Lennox Lewis - he had nothing but his wiliness left and so he used it to get a victory.

The Tyson fights are a great example of how smart Holyfield was. I thought Holy was usually respected as a crafty fighter but I guess not anymore? I personally rate Lewis over Holy because I factor: (1) head to head vs others (2) achievments (3) head to head with each other. However, on (3), Holy wins. His output is too much and his boxing skills are on par.

[Drexl]

So I guess the results are in, huh?

Almost 3-1. It's a landslide. :lol:

[Slothrop]

This poll goes to show why this site should be subtitled "A Lennox Lewis Fan Club"

[Drexl]

This poll goes to show why this site should be subtitled "A Lennox Lewis Fan Club"

I guess that exlains why you are here then, huh? :yep


This place is known on other forums as Klit-huggers central. Hardly a Lennox stronghold.

[Slothrop]

I guess that exlains why you are here then, huh? :yep


This place is known on other forums as Klit-huggers central. Hardly a Lennox stronghold.

Must be because so many Brits and Euro-peeons post here.

[Vanboxingfan]

This poll goes to show why this site should be subtitled "A Lennox Lewis Fan Club"

Why's that?

If posters can back up their views, which many here have done on both sides of the debate, then I think the vote simply reflects what most boxing fans honestly believes would happen. I would certainly think that the number of Americans exceeds the combined total of all other nationalities. Pretty desperate comment if you have to interprete the results based on nationality rather than the arguments presented and what you've seen with your own eyes.

[Zakman]

This poll goes to show why this site should be subtitled "A Lennox Lewis Fan Club"

Bingo. Lewis is grossly overrated on this site, as these poll results demonstrate.:yep

[Drexl]

Bingo. Lewis is grossly overrated on this site, as these poll results demonstrate.:yep

Yes, of course you two are right and the rest of the world are wrong.

Keep the faith Zakman! Your dedication in the face of overwhelming evidence is an inspiration to us all.

Ever thought of taking up religion? you'd make a fantastic Christian Fundamentalist!