Lennox Lewis is the greatest Heavyweight of all time | WrestleZone Forums

Lennox Lewis is the greatest Heavyweight of all time

jmt225

Global Moderator
And the only people who dare to disagree are prejudice Americans who at their core don't know shit about boxing.

The fact of the matter is no one comes close to matching Lennox's resume. No one. He was an Olympic champion. His record was 41-2-1, where he avenged both losses in impressive fashion (brutally knocking out one and made the other cry while he quit), and the draw was horseshit that he would go on to avenge anyway. He beat every champion, legend, contender, and young lion from his era... every single one of them. There was nothing this man didn't do during his reign.

Seriously, check out this list of victories.

Vitali Klitschko - Top 5 GOAT.
Evander Hoyfield - Top 10 GOAT. And beat him twice.
Mike Tyson - Another top 10 GOAT. Was he past his prime? Yeah, but he was still very good and very, very, very dangerous, and Lennox made him look like a bum.
Tommy Morrison - Not an all time great, but would still beat every Heavyweight today without the last name Klitschko.
David Tua - Had perhaps the most devastating punch in boxing history with his left hook and Lewis ate him alive.
Ray Mercer
Hasim Rahman
Oliver McCall
Shannon Briggs
Henry Akinwande
Tony Tucker
Frank Bruno
Francois Botha

And it's not like Lennox had these epic wars against these guys... no, he either completely outclassed them or simply destroyed them.

Lennox Lewis is the greatest Heavyweight boxer of all time. To me, it's not even subjective. If he were American, this "opinion" of mine would be shared by many, many more. It's a shame that this guy will never get the respect and accolades he deserves simply because he was British and a gentleman instead of a loud-mouth thug.
 
Muhammed Ali, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, and Rocky Marciano all beg to differ. I'm not disagreeing, God knows I am no boxing expert but all four of those guys had tremendous Heavyweight careers. My personal preferences aside I certainly believe Lennox is a top 5 Heavyweight, but I would never put him ahead of Muhammed or Rocky Marciano. Then again it is pointless to debate such a trivial thing considering no body will ever be proven right. Ali won't be fighting ever again and Rocky is dead. Lennox was a tremendous boxer, I just don't think he was the best of all time. And, that's not coming from a prejudiced American .
 
It's not really about who can beat who... it's about overall resume, and the fact of the matter is, there is no Heavyweight in the history of boxing whose resume comes close to touching Lennox Lewis', which is why I consider him the greatest of all time in the division.

All Rocky Marciano has going for him is that he was undefeated, but who did he beat that was worth a damn? And Ali, Foreman, and Frazier... when these guys weren't fighting each other, they too fought mostly bums. Lennox consistently fought legit competition throughout his entire career, and he dominated them all. His accomplishments are remarkable.
 
I am inclined to agree, I still remember that fight against Klitschko, Vitali still maintains that he was "technically" superior, which means dick after a bloke's hit you so fucking hard the ref has to stop the match because you cant even see. Had that match continued it would've been a total domination. Now look at Klitschko, boring cunt that he is. Lewis just flat out dominated, all the time.

Ali has the rep though, maybe rightly so, for entertainment value there has never been anybody better, and to go into wrestling terms, he won every fued that he was in (feel free to correct me on that, I wont cry much) His verbal ability and like I said, entertainment value pushes him over the edge, he's had the more memorable great fights, heavyweight clashes and, to be fair, he won most of them.

I'd go with Lewis's record, but I'd pay to watch Ali again.
 
And the only people who dare to disagree are prejudice Americans who at their core don't know shit about boxing.

Well I'm English and I totally disagree with you so that's your theory fucked.

Jack Dempsey
Joe Louis
Rocky Marciano
Floyd Patterson
Muhammad Ali
Joe Frazier
George Foreman
Larry Holmes
Mike Tyson
Evander Holyfield

All of them were (in their prime) better than Lennox. I'd strongly consider adding Vitali too given the way he battered Lewis in his last fight.
Now of the list of fighters you put, only 3 are worth shit but I will mention that he lost to the "greatness" of Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman :lmao: Anyway....

Holyfield (who was 38 at the time)
Tyson (Who was 10 years past his best)
Klitchko (Who he got a cheap cuts win over when he was losing)

As for the resume of greater people you dismissed, just because you don't know who they fought doesn't make them bums. For example on Marciano's card he has wins over Eddie Charles, JJ Walcott, Joe Louis, Archie Moore.
Just to kil this arguement dead, Ali has victorys over

Ken Norton
Joe Frazier
Joe Bugner
George Foreman
Floyd Patterson
Sonny Liston

Oh and an olympic gold.

Game, set and match. Thanks for playing.
 
And the only people who dare to disagree are prejudice Americans who at their core don't know shit about boxing.

I'm American, I come from a boxing background, and I disagree. I have no prejudice, and at my core I am a lifelong fan of boxing and I've actually been in the ring before. I know about boxing.

The fact of the matter is no one comes close to matching Lennox's resume. No one. He was an Olympic champion. His record was 41-2-1, where he avenged both losses in impressive fashion (brutally knocking out one and made the other cry while he quit), and the draw was horseshit that he would go on to avenge anyway. He beat every champion, legend, contender, and young lion from his era... every single one of them. There was nothing this man didn't do during his reign.

Well, he didn't go against the one guy in a rematch that looked to be able to beat him, and rather than face the worthy contender he turned tail and retired. The scorecards had Klitschko winning that fight before it was stopped for cuts(rightfully so) and Lewis was fortunate that it did end the way it did. The truth of that matter which you may or may not have been privy to, is that Lennox Lewis and Vitali Klitschko met in private at Lennox Lewis' house to discuss a rematch. But, Lennox's mother didn't want him to fight Klitschko for fear of what might happen to him. That's the truth, and Lewis used it as an escape clause to retire rather than face the biggest challenge of his career and possibly lose.

Seriously, check out this list of victories.

Okay, let's do just that.

Vitali Klitschko - Top 5 GOAT.

I just talked about this one above. Rather than having a mandatory re-match he retired because he simply didn't want to face someone he wasn't sure he could beat. He had no real advantage over Klitschko physically which was what he relied on most, and we will get into that more down the list. This was a guy who he knew could get to him, that would go toe-to-toe, who took his best shots and kept coming. He wanted nothing to do with him after their first encounter, and he was well on his way to a loss before the fight was stopped due to cuts. In all fairness, you can't say those cuts caused themselves. Lewis did inflict damage to Klitschko causing the stoppage, but it looked worse than it was, and even Vitali himself wanted to keep going so it couldn't have been that bad. Lewis got away lucky on this one.

Evander Hoyfield - Top 10 GOAT. And beat him twice.

Correction, he beat him once. Their first fight was a draw s/d. Holyfield was on the decline, but besides that there is something else that needs to be addressed. Size and reach. Lewis' stature won the day against Holyfield, and a lot of other guys. The younger Holyfield was able to overcome size and reach at times as he displayed against Riddick Bowe. What was also displayed against Bowe was that he clearly had problems with guys that big, as anyone Holyfield's size generally does. He was a blown up Cruiserweight to begin with so size and reach were pretty significant here. If Lennox didn't have a 6 inch reach advantage, 3 inch height advantage, even the older Holyfield could likely get inside that jab.

Mike Tyson - Another top 10 GOAT. Was he past his prime? Yeah, but he was still very good and very, very, very dangerous, and Lennox made him look like a bum.

No, Tyson was a shell of his former self, nowhere near as good as he had been even before the Holyfield fights. This incarnation of Tyson was shot, disheartened and jaded with the sport, and fighting for nothing but a check. He wasn't even dangerous anymore, at least not to someone like Lewis or many of the other heavyweights in the division at the time. Tyson was all name recognition at this point. He made Tyson look like a bum, because that's what he was at this point. Once again, he was also incredibly larger than Tyson, more so than he was to Holyfield. Tyson always had trouble with big-tall guys like that. Early on in his career he was gifted enough to overcome the size of a lot of his opponents, but that didn't last too long.

Tommy Morrison - Not an all time great, but would still beat every Heavyweight today without the last name Klitschko.

Morrison was pretty good, not an all time great as you said, but he was long exposed by the time Lewis got to him and had been having a lot of trouble in his last slew of fights. He likely would beat most of todays crop not named Klitschko, but now we're talking about an entirely different era of boxing. Also, this is another opponent which Lewis had a great size advantage over.

David Tua - Had perhaps the most devastating punch in boxing history with his left hook and Lewis ate him alive.

David Tua was a heavybag with eyeballs. Sure, he was a big puncher, but saying he had perhaps the most devastating punch in boxing history is quite a stretch. He was a decent fighter, but once again you have a situation where the guy Lewis is fighting is much smaller than him.

Ray Mercer

Took Lewis to the brink in a close decision, and serves as another example of a smaller guy with a shorter reach that just couldn't get inside his long jab. I don't keep mentioning this to diminish Lewis either, he had a great jab, but a lot of that was due to his size and reach advantage over a lot of his opponents, it's just an obvious observation and tells the story more honestly.

Hasim Rahman

Knocked him out, and lost a rematch.

Oliver McCall

Also knocked him out and lost a rematch.

Shannon Briggs

One of the only bigger men Lewis ever fought, and Briggs almost knocked him out early on in the fight but ran out of gas doing so, leading to him eventually being knocked out himself.

Henry Akinwande
Tony Tucker
Frank Bruno
Francois Botha

All four of these guys were average at best. Akinwande was a guy with a padded record he built in his own backyard against second rate fighters, then came up against a first rate fighter in Lewis. Tony Tucker was a guy with his best years behind him in the 80's when he fought Lewis. To Tony Tucker's credit though he did take Mike Tyson to a 12 round decision which he lost in 1987, and went on to beat Akinwande shortly after losing to Lewis, and had beat Oliver McCall prior to facing Lewis, but before Lewis himself would lose to McCall, so this fight made sense at the time. Frank Bruno was another guy with a padded record against nobodies built in his own backyard and would rarely leave it. His most notable wins are against James Tillis, Jesse Ferguson, and Oliver McCall which isn't much of a resume. Francois Botha, the "White Buffalo" lost every notable fight he ever had and was never that good to begin with.

And it's not like Lennox had these epic wars against these guys... no, he either completely outclassed them or simply destroyed them.

That's because none of them were that good. I wouldn't say he either "outclassed them or destroyed them" either. He had sound boxing skills and physical attributes that accentuated those skills giving him an edge against most guys. The few he faced that were his size or bigger gave him problems with the exception of Golota who was a basket case anyways.

Lennox Lewis is the greatest Heavyweight boxer of all time. To me, it's not even subjective. If he were American, this "opinion" of mine would be shared by many, many more. It's a shame that this guy will never get the respect and accolades he deserves simply because he was British and a gentleman instead of a loud-mouth thug.

I think the "If he were American" bullshit can stop right now. You're the only one expressing any prejudice here, and it's clearly against Americans, but who can blame you, he's the only one you have to cling on to. All the other British fighters come here or somewhere else and get their asses kicked See: Carl Froch vs Andre Ward or Mikkel Kessler(In Denmark), Ricky Hatton vs Manny Pacquiao or Floyd Mayweather, Amir Khan vs Lamont Peterson, David Haye vs Wladimir Klitschko(which didn't happen here but is another example of an over hyped Brit getting his ass kicked rightfully, Prince Naseem Hamed was another big let down as well, you can blame Marco Antonio Barrera for that one.

And, a lot of these guys are the biggest shit talkers around. You care to defend David Chisora either? Lewis was a loudmouth in his own right as well, and hardly a gentlemen. He was too busy fawning over himself to ever give anyone else credit, even Klitschko when he took him for the ride of his life. He never stopped praising himself and discrediting the people he faced which is why a lot of American didn't like him. He was a poor winner, and a sore loser. You want to say it's because he wasn't a loudmouth thug as if that is what we praise over here in the world of boxing, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Lewis was given his due while he was on top, and the American boxing press often noted in the early 90's how he was ducked by a lot of the top ranked fighters, Riddick Bowe most notably, so you can seriously drop that anti-American shit right now.

You clearly don't know shit about Americans or their opinions on Lennox Lewis. First of all, we made the guy a star over here and he is credited by many American boxing aficionados as a highly underrated and under appreciated heavyweight in his time. He was a great fighter and a great champion, no one has ever said less of him that I have ever heard. He was even given more credit for his wins against Tyson and Holyfield than they possibly warranted due to WHEN he beat them, well past their primes. I am with you all day that Lewis is one of the greatest heavyweights of all time, no question about it. However, he is not THE greatest heavyweight of all time by a long shot.
 
I'm Canadian... :) Lennox Lewis represented Canada when he won the Olympic Gold so I have no reason to over look him.

I don't follow boxing to closely and my information and memory will not be up to snuff with a lot of posters above, but I remember much of Lewis's run from his first bout with Holyfield on. I remember the screw job that match was for Lewis, but let's get to my opinion. Lewis was a great Heavyweight Boxer and I would have no trouble at all putting him in the top 10 of his class and maybe the top 5, but would I put him as the greatest boxer of all time I would have to disagree.

JMT you seem to know a lot about what your talking about and from many previous posts I've read of yours I respect your opinion among the most in WZ, but my opinion on the matter is from Holyfield on Lewis really fought no one of considerable difficulty or challenge. Lewis is almost a modern day Tiger Woods in boxing... in the sense that Tiger really had no competition from 1999-2008. Yea there were golfers who won tournaments, but Tiger dominated the sport because he had one near his equal. When Nicklaus was king he had Palmer, Watson, Player, and a few others who could challenge him regularly. Lewis had no equal, while Ali, Frazer, and Forearm, would push each other because they were near equally the best.

Holyfield was over the hill when he fought Lewis. Tyson was barely a boxer. You left out John Ruiz and for good reason. Tua may have had a wicked punch, but he had no reach compared to Lewis. Rahman is almost proof Lewis had no competition because he took Rahman far too lightly and that's why he lost. Lewis proved Rahman was no where near his level in the rematch, but it's because the competition Lewis fought as champion was so far beneath him, he took this challeneger lightly. One of the greatest, sure, no problem agreeing with you. The best... that can't be accurately determined, but you do make strong points. I simply disagree with your final assessment.
 
Well I'm English and I totally disagree with you so that's your theory fucked.

You're right... it was stupid of me to limit ignorance to just the Americans.

Jack Dempsey

Bad losses and beat nothing but bums. And to think someone from that era could actually compete against someone like Lennox Lewis is beyond ******ed.

Joe Louis

The most overrated boxer in history. While he was padding his record, the legit competition was out fighting World War 2.

Rocky Marciano

I'll get to him in a minute.

Floyd Patterson

I can understand some of the names on the list since it's typical ignorance, but to include this guy's name takes all credibility away from anything else you have to say. Every top guy from his era that Patterson face, he fucking lost to. Yet you want to sit there and claim he's better than someone who beat every single person his era had to offer? Give me a fucking break.

Muhammad Ali

I'll get to him in a minute.

Joe Frazier

Beat Ali once and people want to proclaim him a top 5 GOAT. Please. Not only was he completely embarrassed against George Foreman twice, but he beat no one else worth a damn. No one.

George Foreman

Great puncher but was extremely flawed. He stands a chance against anyone, I give him that, but still... his resume isn't much to speak of. Outside of beating Frazier twice and winning the belt at such an old age, what else did he do?

Larry Holmes

Almost as big of a joke as including Patterson. The only reason this guy ever got any hype was because he beat Ali when Ali was shot. Outside of that, who else did he beat? Leon Spinks? LOL.

Mike Tyson

Tyson is my all time favorite fighter, but no. Tyson ducked Lewis for nearly 10 years and for good reason. Stupid to include him here.

Evander Holyfield

Another guy who ducked Lewis for many years before having no other choice but to fight him, and got his ass kicked twice when he finally stepped to the plate. You really want to say he's better than Lennox Lewis? Absolute joke.

All of them were (in their prime) better than Lennox.

Wrong.

I'd strongly consider adding Vitali too given the way he battered Lewis in his last fight.

Who won?

Now of the list of fighters you put, only 3 are worth shit but I will mention that he lost to the "greatness" of Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman

I didn't call them great, but they are good wins. They're better than fucking Chuck Wepner and anyone Marcino ever beat, that's for sure.

Holyfield (who was 38 at the time)
Tyson (Who was 10 years past his best)

Still great fighters at the time, and as I said, DUCKED Lewis for many years before that.

Klitchko (Who he got a cheap cuts win over when he was losing)

Lewis lost the early rounds but was beginning to take over the fight once he CAUSED the cut to Vlad (and it was in no way "cheap").

As for the resume of greater people you dismissed, just because you don't know who they fought doesn't make them bums. For example on Marciano's card he has wins over Eddie Charles, JJ Walcott, Joe Louis, Archie Moore.

If Marciano fought today, he would be fighting at Cruiserweight, if not Light Heavyweight. The same applies to nearly every guy he ever fought. You just cannot compare those fighters to the ones of Lewis' era. Period.

Just to kil this arguement dead, Ali has victorys over

Ken Norton
Joe Frazier
Joe Bugner
George Foreman
Floyd Patterson
Sonny Liston

Oh and an olympic gold.

Ali is the one person who competes, no doubt about it. But still... he didn't DOMINATE guys like Lewis did. Ali struggled against guys he shouldn't have, and lost fights he shouldn't have. The two FLUKE losses Lewis had, he more than made up for. Not to mention Lewis would go on to retire after beating the guy who went on to dominate the division for the next 10 years. How did Ali's career end? You have to include that when talking about overall resume.

Game, set and match. Thanks for playing.

Epic, epic fail. You would have done better if you only argued for let's say Ali and Marciano, but to include some of those ridiculous names you did just shows that for some reason you have a major bias against Lewis and simply don't like him.
 
lewis barely eeked out a win over mercer, and was booed after the decision was announced and lost in early rounds to not one but two soupcans, rahman and maccoll, how exaclty is that the best?
Ali had defeats but he never went out in the second round like Lewis
Mariciano beat everyone
Louis fought more fighters and avenged his only bad loss
 
You're right... it was stupid of me to limit ignorance to just the Americans.

So if anyone disagrees with you they're ignorant? Really interesting debating pattern there.

Bad losses and beat nothing but bums. And to think someone from that era could actually compete against someone like Lennox Lewis is beyond ******ed.

You know what good point except you're ignoring everything. First off, Dick Butkus wouldn't be a great player in today's NFL, nor would guys like Otto Graham, or Sammy Baugh. Babe Ruth is the same way in my opinion, but it doesn't detract from their greatness. He also beat the likes of Jack Sharkey who was a world champion, Georges Carpentier who was a world champion in multiple weight classes, Tommy Gibson who won over 90 fights and lost like 5, and just happens to be a hall of famer.

Just because you don't know them doesn't mean they were bums.

The most overrated boxer in history. While he was padding his record, the legit competition was out fighting World War 2.

Okay, 69-3-1 was just because he was padding his record against hall of famers like John Henry Lewis, James Louis Bivins, Tommy Farr one of the best british heavyweights of all time, and dominated defending his title more times than any other heavyweight champion ever has. Also, he knocked out five
world champions during this time frame. Yep, highly overrated.

I'll get to him in a minute.
Can't wait!

I can understand some of the names on the list since it's typical ignorance, but to include this guy's name takes all credibility away from anything else you have to say. Every top guy from his era that Patterson face, he fucking lost to. Yet you want to sit there and claim he's better than someone who beat every single person his era had to offer? Give me a fucking break.
Okay I really can't defend Patterson being on his list at all lol.

I'll get to him in a minute.
Okay!

Great puncher but was extremely flawed. He stands a chance against anyone, I give him that, but still... his resume isn't much to speak of. Outside of beating Frazier twice and winning the belt at such an old age, what else did he do?
Won his first forty fights? defeated Ken Norton? and for a person who's propping up Mike Tyson as a top ten GOAT you sure like slamming people who have done more than him.

Tyson is my all time favorite fighter, but no. Tyson ducked Lewis for nearly 10 years and for good reason. Stupid to include him here.
You have very bad taste in fighters then. And hardly top ten all time.


I didn't call them great, but they are good wins. They're better than fucking Chuck Wepner and anyone Marcino ever beat, that's for sure.
Archie Moore, oh and a guy named Joe Louis, I guess they're better than him just because you think he's so highly overrated.

If Marciano fought today, he would be fighting at Cruiserweight, if not Light Heavyweight. The same applies to nearly every guy he ever fought. You just cannot compare those fighters to the ones of Lewis' era. Period.
And if Babe Ruth played today, he's have to play against black players, and most of the ALL TIME GREAT athletes would be embarrassed by today's average players but it still doesn't take away from their greatness. Your argument is that you can't compare them because of era, you can say that about ANY sport but then we shouldn't compare anyone unless they are in the same era

Ali is the one person who competes, no doubt about it. But still... he didn't DOMINATE guys like Lewis did. Ali struggled against guys he shouldn't have, and lost fights he shouldn't have. The two FLUKE losses Lewis had, he more than made up for. Not to mention Lewis would go on to retire after beating the guy who went on to dominate the division for the next 10 years. How did Ali's career end? You have to include that when talking about overall resume.

Well true, but you also don't account for the three years ali was out in the prime of his career, you can say he had it coming to him, but even if he had gone he would've probably lost that time anyways. Almost four years during a time when he had defeated EVERYONE. Sonny Liston who many thought was unbeatable, he defeated two time world champion Floyd Patterson who isn't better than Lewis but was still a major player. Archie Moore, and everyone else that came near him.

He dominated the most dominating heavyweight of all time at that time. The guy was dominating everyone before he had to stop then came back after three years and FINALLY lost.

Ali was so good that he lost YEARS in the prime of his career, came back and became the man yet again. Beats hall of famer Ken Norton two out of three times, Hall of famer Joe Fraizer two out of three times, embarrassed Hall of famer George Foreman, All the while adopting and changing his styles so he could dominate well into his 30's when he should've already been retired. Sure the end sucked, but Jordan played for the Wizards, Rice Played for the Seahawks, it doesn't effect their place in history.

Vitali Klitschko - Top 5 GOAT.
Besides Shannon Briggs, who has he beaten? Yes, he's dominating but top five all time? You say Joe Louis is overrated, and you're going to call Klitschko top five of all time? WOW, that's sad.

Evander Hoyfield - Top 10 GOAT. And beat him twice.\
Okay I'll give you that, good point. But he was out of his prime.

Mike Tyson - Another top 10 GOAT. Was he past his prime? Yeah, but he was still very good and very, very, very dangerous, and Lennox made him look like a bum.
He's not top ten, not at all he's top twenty but not ten. I'd say top 15, personally. Anyone else below this isn't even worth my time to break down honestly.

Epic, epic fail. You would have done better if you only argued for let's say Ali and Marciano, but to include some of those ridiculous names you did just shows that for some reason you have a major bias against Lewis and simply don't like him.

Except, you have nothing to back up half the stuff you say. Yes Lewis is great, he's on my top five which is MUCH higher than most. He's an amazing fighter but truth be told, his resume doesn't stack up to Ali's or Marciano's, or Louis' for that matter. You are just bias TOWARDS him and if anyone disagrees with you they must be an ignorant fool because they can't possibly disagree with your wisdom.

And as far as Lewis' loses being flukes, it wasn't like it was Pac-man vs Bradley, he got knocked out.He lost straight up, nothing fluke like about it on that day, those guys were just better.
 
So if anyone disagrees with you they're ignorant? Really interesting debating pattern there.

Talking like that was to bring attention to the thread in a section and subject that doesn't get much action around here. I'm really not that big of a jackass.

You know what good point except you're ignoring everything. First off, Dick Butkus wouldn't be a great player in today's NFL, nor would guys like Otto Graham, or Sammy Baugh. Babe Ruth is the same way in my opinion, but it doesn't detract from their greatness. He also beat the likes of Jack Sharkey who was a world champion, Georges Carpentier who was a world champion in multiple weight classes, Tommy Gibson who won over 90 fights and lost like 5, and just happens to be a hall of famer.

Regardless of all that, today's athlete > yesterday's athlete. I had a long debate about this in a CM Punk/Lou Thesz thread. I'm sure you would have enjoyed it, lol.

Okay, 69-3-1 was just because he was padding his record against hall of famers like John Henry Lewis, James Louis Bivins, Tommy Farr one of the best british heavyweights of all time, and dominated defending his title more times than any other heavyweight champion ever has. Also, he knocked out five world champions during this time frame. Yep, highly overrated.

I stand by my statement. The guys you named had tons of losses. Yeah, they fought more often than today's boxer, but their level of competition wasn't that great. Sugar Ray Robinson fought a lot as well and still managed a 128-1-1 record at one time. Anyone truly "great" from that era could have done the same, but they were few and far between.

Won his first forty fights? defeated Ken Norton? and for a person who's propping up Mike Tyson as a top ten GOAT you sure like slamming people who have done more than him.

Won his first 40 fights against bums, and a Ken Norton victory is good, but not great.

Frazier was overrated because he got one fluke knockout over Ali. If it wasn't for that and Ali's constant bad mouthing of him, Frazier wouldn't be ranked nearly as high as he is.

You have very bad taste in fighters then. And hardly top ten all time.

Yes he is. People underrate Tyson because his big run included beating pretty much nothing but bums, but still... the way he beat them was truly remarkable. Tyson's punching power and speed could not be denied. He also had tremendous head movement and defense. If Cus D'Amato hadn't died there's no telling how far Tyson would have gone undefeated.

Archie Moore, oh and a guy named Joe Louis, I guess they're better than him just because you think he's so highly overrated.

He beat Louis just as he was getting out of the sport. That's like crediting Larry Holmes for beating Ali.

Well true, but you also don't account for the three years ali was out in the prime of his career, you can say he had it coming to him, but even if he had gone he would've probably lost that time anyways. Almost four years during a time when he had defeated EVERYONE. Sonny Liston who many thought was unbeatable, he defeated two time world champion Floyd Patterson who isn't better than Lewis but was still a major player. Archie Moore, and everyone else that came near him.

He dominated the most dominating heavyweight of all time at that time. The guy was dominating everyone before he had to stop then came back after three years and FINALLY lost.

Ali was so good that he lost YEARS in the prime of his career, came back and became the man yet again. Beats hall of famer Ken Norton two out of three times, Hall of famer Joe Fraizer two out of three times, embarrassed Hall of famer George Foreman, All the while adopting and changing his styles so he could dominate well into his 30's when he should've already been retired. Sure the end sucked, but Jordan played for the Wizards, Rice Played for the Seahawks, it doesn't effect their place in history.

This is a very good and fair argument. Like I told Loveless, Ali is the one person in contention and who I'd be willing to settle on.

Plus, it helps that I know Ali is someone who would have done very well in boxing today and during Lennox's run. Sorry, I know you don't like that, but I take that into consideration when looking at a subject like this.

Besides Shannon Briggs, who has he beaten? Yes, he's dominating but top five all time? You say Joe Louis is overrated, and you're going to call Klitschko top five of all time? WOW, that's sad.

It's not about who he has beaten (though I will say if you consider his victories worthless, then you shouldn't defend some of the guys you're defending), but watching him fight you know he's someone hardly anyone throughout the history of the sport would have been able to defeat. His size, strength, athleticism, intelligence.... he's an all time great, that's all there is to it.

[/QUOTE]And as far as Lewis' loses being flukes, it wasn't like it was Pac-man vs Bradley, he got knocked out.He lost straight up, nothing fluke like about it on that day, those guys were just better.[/QUOTE]

They were flukes because Lewis beat their asses in the rematch, and everyone knows he would beat those guys at least 9 out of 10 times.
 
Talking like that was to bring attention to the thread in a section and subject that doesn't get much action around here. I'm really not that big of a jackass.

Well it's worked and you do have a point. Lewis is defiantly underrated, number one? I can't buy, top five, hell yeah I would support every word.

Regardless of all that, today's athlete > yesterday's athlete. I had a long debate about this in a CM Punk/Lou Thesz thread. I'm sure you would have enjoyed it, lol.
True and I agree, but that said it doesn't detract from what Lou Thesz did or why he's still known to this day.

I stand by my statement. The guys you named had tons of losses. Yeah, they fought more often than today's boxer, but their level of competition wasn't that great. Sugar Ray Robinson fought a lot as well and still managed a 128-1-1 record at one time. Anyone truly "great" from that era could have done the same, but they were few and far between.
Actually they really didn't. And you're also talking about a time when people would fight each other repeatedly. I don't know how many times I've seen fighters from that era have four or more loses to one opponent, someone like Ray Robinson, yes it diminishes them slightly but not to the level you have insinuated.

Won his first 40 fights against bums, and a Ken Norton victory is good, but not great.
Except Tyson did the same things and you defend him. If anything what Foreman's done is more impressive.

Frazier was overrated because he got one fluke knockout over Ali. If it wasn't for that and Ali's constant bad mouthing of him, Frazier wouldn't be ranked nearly as high as he is.
This is my problem with you, first off you're wrong about so many things here. The number one is that he didn't get a fluke knockout victory over Ali, it was a 15 round decision in which he carved his body up. Which really hurts you because honestly this is the second time you've gotten it totally wrong about two very well known and famous fights.

Which makes me think you don't have the knowledge to even debate that Lewis is the best of all time, if you don't know what happened in the Fight of Century.

Frazier was an unbeatable beast before a guy named Foreman came along. And his only four loses came to two of the greatest heavyweights ever. He beat everyone put in front of him and never had a lose that wasn't to a great fighter.

Not to mention his loses to Ali weren't exactly embarrassments, he had the arguably the best series of fights with an opponent ever.

Yes he is. People underrate Tyson because his big run included beating pretty much nothing but bums, but still... the way he beat them was truly remarkable. Tyson's punching power and speed could not be denied. He also had tremendous head movement and defense. If Cus D'Amato hadn't died there's no telling how far Tyson would have gone undefeated.
Foreman was the same way, until Ali came along no one touched Foreman, no one came close. His power and overall Physique terrified everyone. The people in Ali's corner didn't even want him to take the fight because they were scared for him. Foreman had won 37 of his 40 fights by knockouts including flooring Frazier and Norton in the second round. Amazing feats.

It's still one of the biggest upsets of all time, and no one saw it coming, nobody but Muhammad Ali thought he could beat Foreman, because Foreman was an absolute beast, more so than Tyson for his time.

He beat Louis just as he was getting out of the sport. That's like crediting Larry Holmes for beating Ali.
Well you want to use Ali's late career against him, why is it using it for someone else not credible. He still beat him? now I would say that it was as Ali was going out and not in his prime but neither were Tyson or Holyfeild when they fought Lewis.

This is a very good and fair argument. Like I told Loveless, Ali is the one person in contention and who I'd be willing to settle on.

Plus, it helps that I know Ali is someone who would have done very well in boxing today and during Lennox's run. Sorry, I know you don't like that, but I take that into consideration when looking at a subject like this.

Actually I don't mind it as much when you're not being rude. Honestly, I believe three people all time would've beat Lennox and you'd probably disagree with me. Liston was a beast, actually still haven't seen anyone who can hit that hard. I believe in now Sonny Liston could be world champion. He was so much different and he hit SO FUCKING HARD. Ali, who has the best footwork all time for a heavy and could take shots like no other, and I think Foreman could've beaten him (honestly I'm 50-50 on this one)

It's not about who he has beaten (though I will say if you consider his victories worthless, then you shouldn't defend some of the guys you're defending), but watching him fight you know he's someone hardly anyone throughout the history of the sport would have been able to defeat. His size, strength, athleticism, intelligence.... he's an all time great, that's all there is to it.
He's all time great but not top five, the era you fight in and who you've beaten does matter, also how you've beaten them does as well. If he was in another era I agree but I don't think he can go down as top five unless he would've beaten someone like Lennox.


And as far as Lewis' loses being flukes, it wasn't like it was Pac-man vs Bradley, he got knocked out.He lost straight up, nothing fluke like about it on that day, those guys were just better.[/QUOTE]

They were flukes because Lewis beat their asses in the rematch, and everyone knows he would beat those guys at least 9 out of 10 times.
Well in at least the McCall fight he had his ass handed to him, and nine out of ten? No Rahman's better than that. I believe he would get three at the very least.
 
Except Tyson did the same things and you defend him. If anything what Foreman's done is more impressive.

If you watch Tyson's stuff though it is impossible not to be in awe. Foreman was a huge Heavyweight with unbelievable knockout power. Tyson, on the other hand, was 5'10 and knocking everyone out in his path with some of the most vicious punches anyone has ever seen thrown. His knockout reel is 2nd to none.

This is my problem with you, first off you're wrong about so many things here. The number one is that he didn't get a fluke knockout victory over Ali, it was a 15 round decision in which he carved his body up. Which really hurts you because honestly this is the second time you've gotten it totally wrong about two very well known and famous fights.

That was my bad. I was typing and thinking too fast without proof reading afterward what I said. A part of me was thinking too about the fluke Lewis knockouts since I knew I was about to address that.

Anyway, what I meant to say was that Frazier's VICTORY over Ali is why he's rated so high, and it is. And yes, I do believe it was a fluke. Ali was dominating him early in the fight and then slowed down, and of course after the fight Ali went on to beat his ass twice in rematches. That screams fluke to me, sorry. And as far as Frazier having competitive fights with Ali, so did Chuck Wepner, but I'm not about to rank him over someone like Lewis because of it.

Frazier was an unbeatable beast before a guy named Foreman came along. And his only four loses came to two of the greatest heavyweights ever. He beat everyone put in front of him and never had a lose that wasn't to a great fighter.

And yet, you don't want to give Tyson any credit.

Well you want to use Ali's late career against him, why is it using it for someone else not credible. He still beat him? now I would say that it was as Ali was going out and not in his prime but neither were Tyson or Holyfeild when they fought Lewis.

For an overall resume, yes I do. But Rocky Marciano didn't beat prime Joe Louis, he beat leaving the sport Joe Louis. There's a huge difference.

He's all time great but not top five, the era you fight in and who you've beaten does matter, also how you've beaten them does as well. If he was in another era I agree but I don't think he can go down as top five unless he would've beaten someone like Lennox.

Well that's when I say most of the guys Vitali has beaten during his run would have beaten most of the guys Frazier, Marciano, Louis, etc. beat.

Well in at least the McCall fight he had his ass handed to him, and nine out of ten? No Rahman's better than that. I believe he would get three at the very least.

Rahman only won the fight against Lewis because A) Lennox didn't take him seriously, and B) because of the high altitude in South Africa. A trained Lewis beats Rahman 10 out of 10 times. And that's not me taking anything away from Rahman, I respect him a lot out of a fighter, but he's not on Lennox's level.
 
If you watch Tyson's stuff though it is impossible not to be in awe. Foreman was a huge Heavyweight with unbelievable knockout power. Tyson, on the other hand, was 5'10 and knocking everyone out in his path with some of the most vicious punches anyone has ever seen thrown. His knockout reel is 2nd to none.
I was in awe of tyson but I don't believe he's top ten.

That was my bad. I was typing and thinking too fast without proof reading afterward what I said. A part of me was thinking too about the fluke Lewis knockouts since I knew I was about to address that.

Anyway, what I meant to say was that Frazier's VICTORY over Ali is why he's rated so high, and it is. And yes, I do believe it was a fluke. Ali was dominating him early in the fight and then slowed down, and of course after the fight Ali went on to beat his ass twice in rematches. That screams fluke to me, sorry. And as far as Frazier having competitive fights with Ali, so did Chuck Wepner, but I'm not about to rank him over someone like Lewis because of it.
It wasn't a fluke, Ali lost because he took body shots all day long and it forced him to slow down. And they were great fights, and Frazier wouldn't be that highly ranked without Ali but that also works visa versa.

And yet, you don't want to give Tyson any credit.
I give him lots of credit. I just said he wasn't top 10 imo. I told you he was top 15, he's like 14 or 13th on my list. Which isn't exactly giving him NO credit.


For an overall resume, yes I do. But Rocky Marciano didn't beat prime Joe Louis, he beat leaving the sport Joe Louis. There's a huge difference.
So you do count it.

Well that's when I say most of the guys Vitali has beaten during his run would have beaten most of the guys Frazier, Marciano, Louis, etc. beat.
disagree with some of this but I will agree the athletes are better

Rahman only won the fight against Lewis because A) Lennox didn't take him seriously, and B) because of the high altitude in South Africa. A trained Lewis beats Rahman 10 out of 10 times. And that's not me taking anything away from Rahman, I respect him a lot out of a fighter, but he's not on Lennox's level.
I just disagree
 
I think the guy who posted this originally either is or is pretty close to correct. Moreover I think it's really disrespectful to Lennox Lewis and his generation of fighters who represented the strongest era of boxing in history, to consider someone like Ali and Marciano etc. who wouldn't even be allowed to box with Lewis let alone be competitive with them, to consider them greater in anyway. Of the 50 odd fighters that Muhammad beat, every single one of them would have been KO'd by any of the top 10 of the 90's. Muhammad's resume is worthless because it totally neglects the quality of his opponents. If Lennox was grade A, his gen grade B, then those guys were all C, D and E, i'm sorry. Let's be realistic.

Big George said it himself. "It is now beyond any doubt. Lennox Lewis is the greatest Heavyweight of ALL TIME!". When asked if he would fight anyone from the 90's inc Vitali and Bowe even he would say hell yeah. But when asked about Lewis he always responded honestly. "Not a chance" :)
 
LOL I can't believe anybody, regardless of nationality or whether they like Lewis or not could even seriously try to dispute he was not the greatest based on comparisons with olden days fighters that couldn't survive a sparring session with Lewis. I think even the guys who have tried to argue that above don't really believe it, they just can't accept that time moves on and boxing is a global professional sport now, not an American "backyard contest" like it was in the 70's and beforehand.
 
There are just so many points of rubbish given above it's far too much to respond to. But just for instance, some guy mentioned the "fight of the century" as some kind of proof of Ali's greatness. Can't be for real, one of the most pathetic displays of boxing (if it could be called that) EVER. Clinching, exhaustion, running away, head down pushing, piss weak punches, the most overrated champion in history vs one of the bummiest little fighters who it's embarrassing to even call a champion. THAT was fight of the century and it's undeniable because it can be watched immediately on you tube by anyone and everyone. Compare to Lewis vs <insert legendary condender>... Here we see, despite the fact the opponent was either a former REAL champ or hard hitting, highly skilled contender, dominance. Utter dominance, sharp boxing skills at the highest level, and backed up by supreme power. Ali was punched up from pillar to post in ALL 50 of his BUM fights. Lewis barely got hit by, and beat the living shit out of ALL of his 40 DEADLY opponents. How can you argue with that? Anyone old enough to be an Ali supporter you would think would be mature enough to admit that he was a pretty shit boxer for a "world champion". He wasn't that flash even in his own era!
 
Are you joking?

Lewis beat absolute nobodies in his first 20 fights. Then he beat Razor Ruddock, who Tyson had already obliterated twice and Frank Bruno, who was far more popular than him amongst his home audience. He then lost to Oliver McCall, who had already lost 5 times by that point. When he beat McCall, he was beating a guy that had lost to Frank fucking Bruno.

Tyson "ducking" Lewis is nonsense. Nobody fought Lewis in the 90s because nobody paid to see his fights. He wasn't American, so he couldn't sell there, and he was about 1% as popular as Frank Bruno (though obviously much better), so the British public didn't give a fuck. Lo and behold, as soon as Bruno retired (along with Eubank and Benn, also far more popular than Lewis), Lewis got big money fights.

He beat and drew with Holyfield, who's next three fights were one of each result against John "who is?" Ruiz. If that doesn't show the utter decline Holyfield had entered by that point, fuck knows what else did. He then beat Tyson. In the 21st century. Big deal.

I get where you are coming from, but beating an over the hill Holyfield and a has been Tyson don't qualify him in my eyes to be anything special. Vitali Klitschko is more interesting, but given the utter banality of his career, it's hard to really know how good he ever was.

You seem to be operating on the premise that Lewis was avoided by Tyson and Holyfield in the 90s because they were scared. I'm almost certain it's because he was neither total fodder, so he would command a decent purse, but not sufficiently commercial to bring in the punters to buy it - Lewis was far less popular than Nigel Benn, Frank Bruno, Chris Eubank and even Prince Naseem Hamed in his home country, so his fights did not command the same level of PPV buying, if they were even on that medium at all.

For my money, Tyson is far, far better than Lewis. Holyfield is probably worse. As for other eras, you can't really compare. Modern conditioning and training means Derek Chisora would probably give Muhammed Ali a fight were he to travel back in time, but they're obviously not really in the same league, it's just sport has evolved.
 
Tastycles;

Although I appreciate your more sensible assessment of who deserves to be called "the greatest", I really must defend Lewis record and his opponents. or one, ALL boxers fight bums at the start of their careers, and steadily build up in quality as it progresses (of course it has to be that way). But the point is that, overall, the quality of Lennox's opponents were by far better than any champion previous. And he beat them all too, mostly in dominant fashion. The only champs who could be considered equal or better than Lewis are the Klitschko brothers, especially Wladimir. The debate over who had the more decent opponents, Wlad or Lewis, is hotly disputed among afro and Slavic fans worldwide.

You mentioned Tyson as a better contender than Lennox. I love Tyson, he is my favourite heavyweight and I agree he is certainly near the top. But in direct contradiction to what you said about the quality of Lennox opponents, Mike's opposition made Lennox's look stellar at every respective stage of their careers. I am open to the argument that perhaps Tyson could have whipped Lewis in 88 because despite Lewis being older, he didn't turn pro til later. But once he filled out and matured as a pro, Lennox had the edge. I am also open, and somewhat believe that had things been different for Mike (Rooney stayed on, no prison etc), Mike could have gone on to be the best of the 90's as well. But as Mike was, he was not in the same league as Lennox or the K bros and Holyfield would have always been a difficult opponent for Mike. Also Mike's height and reach was always restricting for him against big guys with skills.

Where you get the idea that other British boxers were more popular than Lennox I don't know. I know Bruno and Naseem of course but the others are obscure. But even Frank and Prince are not household names worldwide, EVERYONE knows who Lennox is. Yes of course his style has been labelled as boring but it was always noted as effective. I think Holyfield has been underrated somewhat too, he was a terrific fighter.
 
Also it is absolutely true that Lennox was ducked by certain other major heavyweights (Bowe, Tyson inc.) Nobody who won a piece of the heavyweight title would have been able to hold on to it for long otherwise with Lewis circling like a shark with the smell of blood. At this stage of his career it was widely regarded he was the front runner and there would have been huge payoffs for anyone who fought him.
 
I think someone's overrating Lennox Lewis.

Ali is the greatest of all time, no questions in my mind. But why is Lewis better then Vitali Klitschko? Klitschko has a perfect record throughout his career except for two losses, and neither of those losses were very credible. Lewis didn't beat Klitschko; Klitschko was winning the fight by all judges scorecards, Lewis just got lucky the fight ended based off the eye injury. The crowd was booing the decision because they knew Lewis didn't win. And then when the WBC demanded a rematch take place Lewis retired; coincidence? I don't think so.
 
This is a h2h discussion of greatest all time hw, Ali doen't even rate, he would fight at cruiser in the modern era and wouldn't be highly competitive at hw.

Lennox, Vitali and Wladimir are the only 3 HW's worth considering for GOAT with respect to their records, all previous eras were a combination of hw and lighter weights, From Lennox's era onward, all opponents on records are real hw's.

Lennox Lewis- Defeated every opponent he ever faced in dominant fashion, avenged his only 2 losses which were freak knockouts and his draw which was a rip off anyway, defeated 2 other highly decorated rivals of his era, Tyson by KO and Holyfield 2ce and was ducked by Bowe who he beat at the Olympics anyway.

Wladimir Klitschko- Has been unbeaten in almost a decade, has beaten more undefeated contenders and has the greatest win:loss:fight ratio of all time and never been behind on points and had more HW experience than any other champ all time.

Vitali Klitschko- Never been off his feet in a professional boxing match and never suffered a clear loss.

However Wlad and Lennox have faced comparably tough opposition during their career, whilst Vitali has not faced the same level. Vitali would have won that fight had it not been for the lucky cut (which he wouldn't have been able to finish the fight with though). But if prime I would still edge Lennox to beat Vitali. They all played in the strongest eras of HW all time.

So apart from Wladimir who is rather equal and Vitali who is somewhat questionable but still relevant, I believe there are only really 3 other possible candidates to challenge Lennox...

Mike Tyson: Some people claim prime Mike Tyson would have been able to defeat Holyfield and Lewis and move on to be the GOAT

Evander Holyfield: Some people claim prime Holyfield would always have been able to shut down prime Tyson and defeat Lennox Lewis.

Riddick Bowe: Some people claim that a 92 Bowe who was dedicated could have defeated Lennox Lewis if he had the will to fight him.

All these 3 are unproven along with Vitali, leaving only Wladimir as serious contender for GOAT.

Others argue Larry Holmes may have out boxed Lewis or Foreman may have knocked him out but these are even further outside shots.

So hope that clears it up. Without a clear signature fight against a revered opponent for Wladimir and other speculation aside, this guy is probably correct... Lennox Lewis is the greatest HW of all time!
 
jmt225 said:
And the only people who dare to disagree are prejudice Americans who at their core don't know shit about boxing.

The fact of the matter is no one comes close to matching Lennox's resume. No one. He was an Olympic champion. His record was 41-2-1, where he avenged both losses in impressive fashion (brutally knocking out one and made the other cry while he quit), and the draw was horseshit that he would go on to avenge anyway. He beat every champion, legend, contender, and young lion from his era... every single one of them. There was nothing this man didn't do during his reign.

Seriously, check out this list of victories.

Vitali Klitschko - Top 5 GOAT.
Evander Hoyfield - Top 10 GOAT. And beat him twice.
Mike Tyson - Another top 10 GOAT. Was he past his prime? Yeah, but he was still very good and very, very, very dangerous, and Lennox made him look like a bum.
Tommy Morrison - Not an all time great, but would still beat every Heavyweight today without the last name Klitschko.
David Tua - Had perhaps the most devastating punch in boxing history with his left hook and Lewis ate him alive.
Ray Mercer
Hasim Rahman
Oliver McCall
Shannon Briggs
Henry Akinwande
Tony Tucker
Frank Bruno
Francois Botha

And it's not like Lennox had these epic wars against these guys... no, he either completely outclassed them or simply destroyed them.

Lennox Lewis is the greatest Heavyweight boxer of all time. To me, it's not even subjective. If he were American, this "opinion" of mine would be shared by many, many more. It's a shame that this guy will never get the respect and accolades he deserves simply because he was British and a gentleman instead of a loud-mouth thug.

Believe me when I say I am not biased towards the american boxers. But lennox lewis although great was not/is the greatest heavyweight boxer ever. You forget about guys like Rocky Marciano who retired undefeated as the heavyweight champion! So to say he is the greatest ever is unjustified, but I would agree he was the greatest boxer of his period in the heavyweight division.

On the subject of not giving Lenox Lewis accolades you are insane. He is british and as such we reffer to him in our sport quite a lot when you pay attention. Obviously tends to be around the olympics/sports personality of the year/ any british boxing match of any weight class that is publisised.



Posted from Wrestlezone.com App for Android
 
Rocky Marciano was the only unbeaten champ sure. But in today's definition which is what matters now... Rocky was not a heavyweight. Today he would be what is referred to as a cruiserweight, a division that didn't exist then but does now. In fact sometimes Rocky was a light-heavy. And more the point he never once in all those 49 bouts fought a real HW fight! Rocky and all his opponents were all under 200lbs and not modern athletes either as we would view them today. h2h Lennox would not even be allowed to fight Marciano and if he was, Lewis would finish him in seconds.

As far as real HW's go I'd say Lewis is a front runner!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top