A lot of people highly rate Lewis.
And when it comes to head to head fights, a lot think he would beat Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Bowe ,Holyfield AND Tyson.

Does that make him the best heavyweight of all time.
At 6'5 and 240 pds, formidable strength, power, boxer and thinker.
Whats your verdict?

He beat the who's who at that time and he avenged all of his loses. Best of all time? That could be argued. I really don't give a **** about all this GOAT talk. But the best of his era? There is no arguement. He's the best in his time.

no i would put him number 2 right after joe louis

A lot of people highly rate Lewis.
And when it comes to head to head fights, a lot think he would beat Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Bowe ,Holyfield AND Tyson.

Does that make him the best heavyweight of all time.
At 6'5 and 240 pds, formidable strength, power, boxer and thinker.
Whats your verdict?Are you serious?! What, are you 10 years old?! Lennox Lewis is not even in the top 10! Hell, I rate Mike Tyson ahead of him! A fighter whose last name is pronounced the same but spelled differently is the greatest heavyweight of all time. Born Joseph Louis Barrow, he became better known as Joe Louis.

Kind of hard not to put him in the top 10. But he isn't the greatest heavyweight because of his two ugly losses and his best opposition was past their best. He has beaten enough competition to be regarded as one of the best heavyweights of all-time. Some might rank him even in the top 5.

No................

The Greatest Heavyweight of all time does not get cut down by Hasim Rahman in his prime. Whatever the situation.

Then why is it that when ever there's a poll on here, every body seems to say that lennox will beat just about everybody.
I did a poll not too long ago as to who would win between lennox and Ali , and most people voted for Lewis.
And they favour Lewis over most heavyweights because of his size.

The Greatest of all Time isnt based on who can beat who. Plus how can u confidentley say he can beat any other top 10 or 20 for that matter wen he lost to fighters who you would struggle to put in the top 50. Greatest of all time...NO. Top Ten......Yes

no because most of the big names he beat where past there best i think he is top 10 though.

Are you serious?! What, are you 10 years old?! Lennox Lewis is not even in the top 10! Hell, I rate Mike Tyson ahead of him! A fighter whose last name is pronounced the same but spelled differently is the greatest heavyweight of all time. Born Joseph Louis Barrow, he became better known as Joe Louis.

now whats the logic in u thinking tyson is better?

tyson is the most overrared heavy weight champ of all time and lewis would have beat him during any part of his carear

no because most of the big names he beat where past there best i think he is top 10 though.

i agree lewis top 10 maybe top 5

Lennox Lewis is not even in the top 10! Hell, I rate Mike Tyson ahead of him!

lol. :crazy:

Mike Tyson is a joke. However you're right probably not top 10, just outside.

MickeyB - Lewis was not in his prime when cut down against Rahman he was a few years past it and never trained for the fight. Yet he still was able to prove it was a big fluke in the rematch and dispatched him in better style than Rahman had to him.

Lennox Lewis is the 3rd greatest of all time IMO on achievments only. In head to heads though I think he had everything to come out on top in a best of 3 against most if not all the other champions.

There is an argument there for asking this question and for me there are 4 heavyweights that stand out ahead of all the rest and all 4 were great boxers, fast and powerful. I'd have Louis and Lewis as the top 2 and Ali and Holmes as the next best. All 4 of these could have beaten every other heavyweight in history.

Lewis was not the greatest of alltime. A good fighter, with a good record, but:

1/ 2 resounding KO losses to no bodies when he was still in the pinnacle of his career are too much.

2/ Chin was too suspect.

Ali would destroy him, a total shut out with superior speed, ring generalship, jab, heart and chin. A peak Tyson and Foreman would bang him out of there in a few rounds.

top 10, yes, top 5-probably not, top ever: hum of my balls!

Ali nearly got KOed by Henry Cooper, floored by Wepner, and had a few questionable decisions, multiple losses plus a complete spanking in his later years.

talk about rose tinted spectacles. Ali was a phenomenal boxer but Lewis would have given him the fight of his life.

Noooooooooooooooooo

Ali nearly got KOed by Henry Cooper, floored by Wepner, and had a few questionable decisions, multiple losses plus a complete spanking in his later years.

talk about rose tinted spectacles. Ali was a phenomenal boxer but Lewis would have given him the fight of his life.

haha, he NEARLY got koed by cooper, but he still won, he got floored by wepner, but he still won. Lewis got KTFO by complete nobodies, he LOST. I still rate lewis pretty high, top 15 for sure, but comparing him to ali? Ali is #1 or #2 on almost everybodies top ten list.

Lewis was not the greatest of alltime. A good fighter, with a good record, but:

1/ 2 resounding KO losses to no bodies when he was still in the pinnacle of his career are too much.

2/ Chin was too suspect.

Ali would destroy him, a total shut out with superior speed, ring generalship, jab, heart and chin. A peak Tyson and Foreman would bang him out of there in a few rounds.

top 10, yes, top 5-probably not, top ever: hum of my balls!

OH yeah a peak tyson http://www.authenticsportscollectibles.com/store/images/Buster%20Douglas.JPG

he would have banged a prime lewis in a few rounds lol

Then why is it that when ever there's a poll on here, every body seems to say that lennox will beat just about everybody.
I did a poll not too long ago as to who would win between lennox and Ali , and most people voted for Lewis.
And they favour Lewis over most heavyweights because of his size.I'm guessing that's because of the narrower perspective of their youth. He might have been the dominant HW during their formative years. Astute observers of the game and those above, say, 35 years of age would have a much broader perspective, encompassing fighters of an earlier era.

Kids tend to reason as though time began when they were born. "All-time" to them means their time, or no earlier than the modern era.

Are you seriously saying that if Ali fought Lewis 100 times, then Ali would win every time?

Lewis would have a real chance of defeating Ali.

As i have said and as you know, Ali lost to fighters who Lewis could have beaten.

It is therefore a reasonable assumption that Lewis could have beaten Ali.

No there isnt.

If they thought 10 times, peak/peak, Ali would in all probablity beat him every time. LL couldnt KO Ali, bigger hitters didnt, and no way LL could out point Ali.

you are dillusional.

You're living in Lewis's ass if you think LL/Ali is even a worthwhile debate.

Ali lost to Norton, was nearly knocked out by cooper, floored by Wepner, was absolutely brutalized by Frazier, spinks, holmes.

Seriously, if you want to talk about someone nuthugging and looking past FACTS, then its your sorry ass.

Ali lost to Norton, was nearly knocked out by cooper, floored by Wepner, was absolutely brutalized by Frazier, spinks, holmes.

Seriously, if you want to talk about someone nuthugging and looking past FACTS, then its your sorry ass.

Ali was never nearly knocked out by Cooper, he got up in 3 seconds, the knockdown against Wepner was a slip, Frazier didn't brutalize Ali they brutalized each other, Spinks beat an old man, Holmes beat a brain damaged old man.

Lewis has a good chance against Ali but try not to discredit boxers for the sake of your own argument. It's the same thing when people say Lewis was s*** just because he lost to Rahman and McCall while ignoring everything he achieved.

IMO Lewis is a top 10 HW. Some might rank him as high as top 5 or top 3 because they think he does well head-to-head against other boxers and because he avenged all of his losses.

This Tyson Bashing is getting out of control. Lewis lost to two people with less talent then Douglas. And he get 1 punch KOd by them.

But he was still a great fighter, and is in my top 10. I jst dnt like people bashing other fighters while trying to argue for lewis.

Arguable, I'd favor him over most, if not all HW's in the hall of fame.

I'm guessing that's because of the narrower perspective of their youth. He might have been the dominant HW during their formative years. Astute obsevers of the game and those above, say, 35 years of age would have a much broader perspective, encompassing fighters of an earlier era.

Kids tend to reason as though time began when they were born. "All-time" to them means their time, or no earlier than the modern era.


yea i agree with you there.

Kind of hard not to put him in the top 10. But he isn't the greatest heavyweight because of his two ugly losses and his best opposition was past their best. He has beaten enough competition to be regarded as one of the best heavyweights of all-time. Some might rank him even in the top 5.

They weren't actual true losses.
I mean against Mccall, that was a very lucky shot.
Look at the rematch, Lewis was way on top, and Oliver quit.
Against Rahman, again Lewis seemed to get too COMPLACENT, and thats the key word.
He tends to lose concentration momentarily, and before you know it,boom, he gets ko'ed.
Again the rematch, Rahman had nothing, and got ko'ed like a sack of potatoes.
To be honest, I don't put those as losses because the better man won on the night.
Both fights , and it is true, seemed to be lucky punches.
Not because his 2 opponents were overall the better fighters.

Are you serious?! What, are you 10 years old?! Lennox Lewis is not even in the top 10! Hell, I rate Mike Tyson ahead of him!

Are you freaking kidding me? :ugh:

what lewis's ranking is should be considered opinion only.

he has/had to tools to beat any boxer at least once. i say the same about the k brothers - especially vitaly and that mean streak he has.

the above mentioned stand a chance against anyone. that much you can say, and that is as far as it really should be taken!

and, even though i hate lists, how could you rank tyson above lewis? this is not directed at you, parody, as we obviously agree that lewis could beat the hell out of mike more than mike could beat ll.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Panamaniac
Are you serious?! What, are you 10 years old?! Lennox Lewis is not even in the top 10! Hell, I rate Mike Tyson ahead of him!

Are you freaking kidding me?
__________________



yeah, who are you kiddin'? tyson had a huge hype machine. ll didn't. at least not in the states. and ll, although reluctuntly and after ducking him for a year and a half or more, fought big brother klitschko - the baddest and most underrated fighter at the time. and he beat him, although there should be an asterisk next to that fight the way vitali protested it - he obviously had a lot left in the tank. nonetheless, he did get a W in the column that night. something i'm not sure a primed tyson could do. in fact, i'd say a prime tyson couldn't do it at all.

lewis would def be higher than tyson if i had a list.

what lewis's ranking is should be considered opinion only.

he has/had to tools to beat any boxer at least once. i say the same about the k brothers - especially vitaly and that mean streak he has.

the above mentioned stand a chance against anyone. that much you can say, and that is as far as it really should be taken!

and, even though i hate lists, how could you rank tyson above lewis? this is not directed at you, parody, as we obviously agree that lewis could beat the hell out of mike more than mike could beat ll.

Agreed, Lewis on a good day can(does not mean will) beat absolutely any other heavyweight in the world.

Agreed, Lewis on a good day can(does not mean will) beat absolutely any other heavyweight in the world.

right!

same with both klitschko bros. especially vitali. the newer version of wladimir would possibly do the same.

but i stress VK and LL for a reason. to me, they seem to have what it takes to win.

explaining a lil, so as to not change subject much here:

lewis, was a big 6'5"/6'6" or so. he's a big boy from the start. combine his reach, great jabbing, intelligent use or punches, great coordination for a guy his size, and good stamina and you have a beast. a great fighter. and with his experience, although i wish he would've fought byrd arounf 1999 or 2000, he is a hell of a fighter. this, cannot be argued.

and vitali, was even bigger - standing around 6'8". he had a great reach, a potentially powerfull punch in every punch thrown, a steel chin, good stamina, a most unusual style, and a freakish ability to "know" when and where punches are coming most of the time. i relate to his punch "reading" as it is common in martial arts to be training in these areas. VK also had great experience from kickboxing.

both, would give any heavy from any other era hell.

right!

same with both klitschko bros. especially vitali. the newer version of wladimir would possibly do the same.

but i stress VK and LL for a reason. to me, they seem to have what it takes to win.

explaining a lil, so as to not change subject much here:

lewis, was a big 6'5"/6'6" or so. he's a big boy from the start. combine his reach, great jabbing, intelligent use or punches, great coordination for a guy his size, and good stamina and you have a beast. a great fighter. and with his experience, although i wish he would've fought byrd arounf 1999 or 2000, he is a hell of a fighter. this, cannot be argued.

and vitali, was even bigger - standing around 6'8". he had a great reach, a potentially powerfull punch in every punch thrown, a steel chin, good stamina, a most unusual style, and a freakish ability to "know" when and where punches are coming most of the time. i relate to his punch "reading" as it is common in martial arts to be training in these areas. VK also had great experience from kickboxing.

both, would give any heavy from any other era hell.

People are too reluctant to sacrifice the holy cows of the past. But everyone is beatable. And that goes especially for the HW top ten. The fighters there are just that good.

so your saying the great larry holmes won't be able to compete with the robotic vitali??

People are too reluctant to sacrifice the holy cows of the past. But everyone is beatable. And that goes especially for the HW top ten. The fighters there are just that good

fo sure. you are quite right. when it comes to the higher ranks of boxers, it becomes more of a tossup bteween all of 'em. and i don't buy into the tyson hype, or the ali hype. hype is hype. unless the fighters we are talking about actually fought, and fought more than twice, we can only guess.

so your saying the great larry holmes won't be able to compete with the robotic vitali??

how can holmes compete with robotic efficiency???

all kidding aside, vitali is much more of a threat any other boxer than you might imagine.

what you don't see, i do.

fo sure. you are quite right. when it comes to the higher ranks of boxers, it becomes more of a tossup bteween all of 'em. and i don't buy into the tyson hype, or the ali hype. hype is hype. unless the fighters we are talking about actually fought, and fought more than twice, we can only guess.



how can holmes compete with robotic efficiency???

all kidding aside, vitali is much more of a threat any other boxer than you might imagine.

what you don't see, i do.

:rofl: , that's a good point.
I just don't see why you so highly regard the current HW fighters , especially seeing the current state of the HW division.

I dont need to read anything.. the thread title was enough.. 1 star for thread.

I dont need to read anything.. the thread title was enough.. 1 star for thread.I have read a lot of your posts, and you my friend, know nothing about boxing.

tills, i don't highly regard the current heavies. some of them aren't all that bad.

what i mean in the part that you bolded is that i can see where VK moves, and how he moves. i can see that in any fighter. in some martial arts, watching others and picking up where they are coming from quickly is an actual skill.

one, most people never even think to develope. beleive me, vitaly can rock a bunch a "great" heavies.

answer to your question is no

Is Lennox Lewis The Greatest HW Of All Time? IMO No he isnt.

Ali was never nearly knocked out by Cooper, he got up in 3 seconds,

and wobbled over to his corner where angelo cut his glove to buy him some more time.


the knockdown against Wepner was a slip, Frazier didn't brutalize Ali they brutalized each other, Spinks beat an old man, Holmes beat a brain damaged old man.

however you dress it up, he got a whooping.


Lewis has a good chance against Ali but try not to discredit boxers for the sake of your own argument. It's the same thing when people say Lewis was s*** just because he lost to Rahman and McCall while ignoring everything he achieved.

if you are comparing two boxers, then you have to bring up their weaknesses to support your argument.

and wobbled over to his corner where angelo cut his glove to buy him some more time.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jnEDM4EC5kw&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jnEDM4EC5kw&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Myth


however you dress it up, he got a whooping.

Ali got a whooping after being inactive from boxing for years against a top 10 HW. He also gave as good as he got.


if you are comparing two boxers, then you have to bring up their weaknesses to support your argument.

Saying he got whooped by frazier got knocked out by cooper knocked down by wepner, that's not bringing up weaknesses, that's bringing up bias.

The same as if I said that Lewis got laid out by McCall & Rahman he ain't worth s***, a glass jaw (that's forgetting he was out of shape for those fights, only down two times even though he fought huge punchers and he avenged both losses).

that clip showed him gingerly going over to his corner, half the time you couldn`t see what the seconds were doing because the view is obscured.


Ali got a whooping after being inactive from boxing for years against a top 10 HW. He also gave as good as he got.


true


Saying he got whooped by frazier got knocked down by cooper knocked down by wepner, that's not bringing up weaknesses, that's bringing up bias.

They are factual statements, although the word 'whooped' is my opinion, those things happened.

They are factual statements but you should also take in account that the Wepner knockdown was a slip that was ruled a KD and that the KD by Cooper was when Ali was in his early 20's.

A lot of people highly rate Lewis.
And when it comes to head to head fights, a lot think he would beat Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Bowe ,Holyfield AND Tyson.

Does that make him the best heavyweight of all time.
At 6'5 and 240 pds, formidable strength, power, boxer and thinker.
Whats your verdict?

I am a huge Lennox fan but can't go as far as to say he is the Greatest of all time but he is defintely top 10.:boxing:

On achievments no but in the top 3 or 4. In regards to who would beat who then I'd go with one of the same top4 on achievments that being Ali,Louis,Lewis and Holmes. I think these 4 stand out above the rest and all 4 could have beaten everyone else on their day and all would come out top in head to heads as well I think.

Lennox is also one of the very few fighters that beat every man he ever stepped in the ring with......He avenged both of his losses by KO.....well the 2nd McCall fight was very,very strange but nonetheless he won by TKO.

Lennox Lewis is a top 10 heavyweight, but far from the greatest heavyweight of all-time, Head-to-head or accomplishment-wise. Muhammad Ali is the best heavyweight ever and Lewis pales in comparison.:fing02:

Lennox Lewis is a top 10 heavyweight, but far from the greatest heavyweight of all-time, Head-to-head or accomplishment-wise. Muhammad Ali is the best heavyweight ever and Lewis pales in comparison.:fing02:


Totally dude :fing02:

top 10.....

He was stretched by a single punch twice in his career by guys who couldn't crack anyone's top 50. For smarts maybe he gets a beneficial nod, but I don't see him having greater ring intelligence than a post 40 George Foreman or Larry Holmes, both of whom would likely torture Lewis in their primes.

Off the top of my head Ali, Louis, Marciano, Holmes, Liston, Tyson, Foreman, Frazier, Dempsey, they all rate ahead of Lewis. Against second teir greats Lewis is probably favored; Norton, Holyfield, Patterson, Bowe, Walcott...

Lewis wasn't dominant enough to clearly earn favor over the upper echelon guys. It wouldn't be out of reach to envision any of those named to flatten Lewis with a mediocre shot with the exception of the feather fisted Holyfield, but even that shell of Holyfield gave Lewis serious trouble in round 3 of the first fight and round 7 of the second fight.

Aside from quality of competition (Lewis did fight everyone even if they were old) where's the compelling case for Lewis in the top 10? Even the top 15?

Powerful, smart and had a deceptively decent chin and was no slouch.


No he isn't the greatest heavyweight of all time.

Question: Is Lennox Lewis The Greatest HW Of All Time?

Answer: Yes!

Lennox Lewis is a top 10 heavyweight, but far from the greatest heavyweight of all-time, Head-to-head or accomplishment-wise. Muhammad Ali is the best heavyweight ever and Lewis pales in comparison.:fing02:

For me personally, the man in your avatar was the greatest heavyweight of all time!

The problem with threads like this is that peole view greatness differently. Some only think of it in terms of opponents faced, staying undefeated or number of defences.

Where as other people take into account the fighters life as a whole and what personal adversities he had to overcome in order to be a champion.

The problem with threads like this is that peole view greatness differently. Some only think of it in terms of opponents faced, staying undefeated or number of defences.

Where as other people take into account the fighters life as a whole and what personal adversities he had to overcome in order to be a champion.Boy, that's deep...

Question: Is Lennox Lewis The Greatest HW Of All Time?

Answer: Yes!

Question: Does RiZOOM know his boxing?

Answer: No!

For me personally, the man in your avatar was the greatest heavyweight of all time!

Well, that might be pushing it a little, although I would definetely put him above Lewis.:fing02:

Speaking of the greatest...Here's a cool interview he did with Maxim...where he tells the world how many average joe's (not boxers) it would take to take him down...

Great stuff!

http://www.maximonline.com/Ces2008lennoxlewis/video/11360.aspx?src=tstll

Galveston Giant, love your avatar and sig. jj is one of my alltime faves. i have "unforgivable blackness" next to me as i am writing this in fact.

Galveston Giant, love your avatar and sig. jj is one of my alltime faves. i have "unforgivable blackness" next to me as i am writing this in fact.

Johnson is my second favorite fighter under Ali. He was probably the bravest individual who ever lived!:fing02:

Lewis is in my Top 5 if he didn't lose twice then he proberbly would be top 3 100% He would beat pretty much all the great Heavyweights because of his size and he used his height amazingly well.

Not best of all time in my book but i wouldn't argue with anyone that did all you can do in your era is beat everyone and he did he avenged his losses instead of running away from them and beat the best.

Not even close

Well, that might be pushing it a little, although I would definetely put him above Lewis.:fing02:

how do you figure? Jack Johnson didnt defend his title much, and his best wins are over lousy fighters, old men, and guys that weighed below 170lbs. If Lennox Lewis would have fought even Roy Jones, he would have been laughed at and given little to no credit. and thats Roy Jones, one of the best guys(or the best) around 170lbs of all time.

Lennox has a way better record, even if I would never make a case for him being the best of all time.

No way is he the greatest

how do you figure? Jack Johnson didnt defend his title much, and his best wins are over lousy fighters, old men, and guys that weighed below 170lbs. If Lennox Lewis would have fought even Roy Jones, he would have been laughed at and given little to no credit. and thats Roy Jones, one of the best guys(or the best) around 170lbs of all time.


It's kind of funny when people use the 'he only beat lousy old men' argument while defending Lennox Lewis whose two best wins come over lousy old men, Holyfield and Tyson. :banana:

And you do know that the heavyweight limit in Johnson's time was 175 lbs, don't start comparing the heavyweights of that day to the heavyweights of today. It's all about achievements and both Lewis and Johnson had plenty of them.

I put both Johnson and Lewis in the top 5, both are atleast top 10.

It's kind of funny when people use the 'he only beat lousy old men' argument while defending Lennox Lewis whose two best wins come over lousy old men, Holyfield and Tyson. :banana:

And you do know that the heavyweight limit in Johnson's time was 175 lbs, don't start comparing the heavyweights of that day to the heavyweights of today. It's all about achievements and both Lewis and Johnson had plenty of them.

I put both Johnson and Lewis in the top 5, both are atleast top 10.

Tyson and Holyfield were both in better shape then Jeffries, who had been out of boxing for like what,....6 years or something?

and why not compare heavyweights of today to heavyweights of before? If you have a crap heavyweight division in one era, the ruler of that division isnt going to get a lot of credit. If most the Heavyweight challengers of the day arent even bigger than super middleweights, I wouldnt consider it an incredibly strong division.

Lennox was beating up guys like Bruno, Ruddock, Holyfield, Tyson, Morrison, Tucker, McCall, Golota, Tua and more and retired having beaten everyone he had ever faced.
Jack Johnson fought 170lbers, a long retired Jeffries, Fireman Flynn, and some bum that somehow got a title shot named Frank Moran. the only guy that looks like he was any good was Al Kaufman. then Jack loses to an extremely uncoordinated Jess Willard who gets blown away by Dempsey. he was the only healthy big guy fighting in a smaller people's division

I have read a lot of your posts, and you my friend, know nothing about boxing.

other way around..

Tyson and Holyfield were both in better shape then Jeffries, who had been out of boxing for like what,....6 years or something?

and why not compare heavyweights of today to heavyweights of before? If you have a crap heavyweight division in one era, the ruler of that division isnt going to get a lot of credit. If most the Heavyweight challengers of the day arent even bigger than super middleweights, I wouldnt consider it an incredibly strong division.

Lennox was beating up guys like Bruno, Ruddock, Holyfield, Tyson, Morrison, Tucker, McCall, Golota, Tua and more and retired having beaten everyone he had ever faced.
Jack Johnson fought 170lbers, a long retired Jeffries, Fireman Flynn, and some bum that somehow got a title shot named Frank Moran. the only guy that looks like he was any good was Al Kaufman. then Jack loses to an extremely uncoordinated Jess Willard who gets blown away by Dempsey. he was the only healthy big guy fighting in a smaller people's division

What you don't understand is that even the biggest heavyweights of that era were something like 200 pounds, there were some very big guys like Willard and later Carnera but those two were expections.

'The Galveston Giant' Jack Johnson at 205-210 lbs was a big heavyweight back in the day just like Lewis at 230-250 lbs was in this day. They both fought similar sized competition too but mostly fighters who they fought were smaller than they were.

Jeffries was totally past his best I agree but Tyson (36, 235 lbs, in his prime 215 lbs) and Holyfield (37, 215 lbs) were both old and much smaller than Lewis and you criticize Johnson for fighting smaller and older guys.

You have to put it into perspective and not really compare fighters of that era head to head but compare their achievements. Johnson had a 7 year reign as the world champion, he beat all of the eras best (whether they were too old or small in your opinion) and he had a huge impact on the sport

When Johnson finally lost to the much bigger Willard he was 37, 20 lbs heavier than in his prime and hadn't fought very actively in 5 years (except the occasional title defense or two). Johnson also outboxed Willard for 26 rounds until he was finally fatigued enough for Willard to land the KO punch. Johnson didn't lose another match until he was 48.
He went unbeaten for 10 years from 1905 to 1915.

That has to count for something.

I rate both Lewis and Johnson as top 5 heavyweights.

A lot of people highly rate Lewis.
And when it comes to head to head fights, a lot think he would beat Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Bowe ,Holyfield AND Tyson.

Does that make him the best heavyweight of all time.
At 6'5 and 240 pds, formidable strength, power, boxer and thinker.
Whats your verdict?
No LENNOX is'nt the best ever but I think he's the best ever over 6ft. 5in.,.... There should be 3 classes of heavyweights, CRUISER, HEAVY and MASTODON, it's not fair to compare small men to big men, after all an Elephant would win a fight with ANY boxer by FIRST ROUND KAYO. GENE TUNNEY was really a Cruiserweight.