Lennox Lewis vs Roy Jones: who ranks higher on the ATG list?

[General Zod]

Lewis defeated a higher quality of opponent (I don't count Trinidad for Jones as Trinidad came from a lower natural weight class and had been inactive for years).

But I voted Roy Jones. He totally embarassed his opponents, he was that much better than them. The guy was incredible. He was a genius. At times he toyed with his opponents, which people found boring, but a Jones highlights package is up there with the Mike Tysons and Manny Pacquiaos of the world for sheer entertainment.

I'm a big fan of Roy and Lennox, for their class outside the ring as well as in it. Roy's reaction to Lewis being screwed against Holyfield was classic.

fair enough, good post

For the record im not even a Lewis fan, but Sonnybox challenged me to do a thread so I did, with me playing Devils Advocate

The fact that people here cant find a solid arguemnt for Mr Jones makes me believe that they are much closer than I thought.

[General Zod]

It was the sheer dominance over who he did beat, hardly ever lost rounds. You dont fall pound for pound places for not having amazing rivals unless you look mediocre against mediocre opposition. In this time Lewis wasn't even ranked number one heavyweight consistently, Bowe, Holyfield, Tyson and Rahman were ranked ahead of him at times in the 9 years stated

If you are only fighting part time fighters of course you are going to look spectacular. these guys were dreadful: Frazier, Harmon, Kelly, Telesco, Brannon, Vinny Paz etc and top fighter would look good against these types of opponents

He had been a pro fifteen years! Give him a break, everyone is allowed to get old! Lewis had retired after 15 years as a pro!!!!!]

Then he should of retired rather than continuing and harming his legacy

No, he beat Tarver first time and Lacy too......and who knows how he'll do against Hopkins? All when well past prime. If Lewis had kept fighting since what 2003/4 how many more times would he have lost by now?

But its not about fighting past your best, when you know you are clearly on the slide you leave the game rather than staying on and getting wiped out by fighters like Green. Lacy is also washed up and never that good to begin with

Yes but Lewis's losses came against journeyman heavyweights who were massive underdogs in the first place. Damn right he should have avenged them. Plus Lewis was at least near his best when he lost these fights, he certainly wasn't shot. Roy was beaten by exceptional fighters when well past prime

You consider : Tarver, Johson and Green exceptional?

Who are these fighters that you think prime Jones should have faced? Jirov Mitchelcheivski (spelt wrong probably).Cant see him being an underdog there.

It doesnt matter if he was the underdog or not, fights are decided in the ring not in the bookies.
Jrov who HBO wanted him to fight
McClellan who was calling him out at MW
Nunn who was his mandatory in 97
Rochiagnni who was the WBC champion, before he was stripped and had his belt given back to Jones
Liles at SMW
Benn at SMW
Eubank who offered him a fight at SMW
Toney II at LHW, which HBO also wanted

[Shazam!]

When Holyfield fought Lewis in 99 he was a very, very good fighter. He was undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, having KOed Tyson about two and a half years earlier and going undefeated since then. He was rated as top 10 P4P in the world and his profile was so high in the late 90's that Ring Magazine in 1998 had him something like 3rd greatest heavyweight of all time (which is highly contentious but indicative of profile in the late 90's).

Holyfield is clearly a fighter who didn't deteriorate in the 90's in the same way that the likes of Tyson (mentally) and Bowe (physically) did.

Holyfield is a tough son of a ***** with an amazing chin, who kept himself in tip top shape throughout his career and with the help of dirty headbutting was able to maintain a very high level even in to his 40's. When he fought Lewis in 99 I believe he was in his mid-30's and still, if not in his prime, very close to it. The years prior to losing to Lewis were some of the best of his career.

A lot of comparisons can be made between Holyfield and Hopkins. Although Hopkins is still top 10 P4P now and Holyfield is nowhere near, they were both fighters who's conditioning, ring intelligence and questionable tactics kept them at the top of the game for a long time.

Funny how people forget. I remember before the Lewis/Tyson fight there were people everywhere saying Tyson was gonna knock Lewis out. Then after the fight it's 'oh, he was shot. It doesn't count,' when in fact, a lot of them are the same people who predicted a Tyson victory. And fair enough. Tyson's only career losses in the 17 years prior to the Lewis fight were in 90 against Douglas and the fights against Holyfield. Obviously Tyson wasn't the same fighter when he fought Lewis but it's laughable to see some of the crap people come out with like 'I could have beaten him that night'. No. Half of the story is usually how well the opposition handled the situation.

But this is how the average, fickel boxing fan takes their own personal slant on events in order to suit an argument.

For an indication of how meritable a victory is, try to remember (or research) what the climate was like BEFORE the fight took place and measure the victory against what those expectactions were. It's the easiest thing in the world to say someone was shot AFTER the event. If you had any real knowledge of the situation and any balls, you'd have made that same statement before the fight, not after it.

[General Zod]

When Holyfield fought Lewis in 99 he was a very, very good fighter. He was undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, having KOed Tyson about two and a half years earlier and going undefeated since then. He was rated as top 10 P4P in the world and his profile was so high in the late 90's that Ring Magazine in 1998 had him something like 3rd greatest heavyweight of all time (which is highly contentious but indicative of profile in the late 90's).

Holyfield is clearly a fighter who didn't deteriorate in the 90's in the same way that the likes of Tyson (mentally) and Bowe (physically) did.

Holyfield is a tough son of a ***** with an amazing chin, who kept himself in tip top shape throughout his career and with the help of dirty headbutting was able to maintain a very high level even in to his 40's. When he fought Lewis in 99 I believe he was in his mid-30's and still, if not in his prime, very close to it. The years prior to losing to Lewis were some of the best of his career.

A lot of comparisons can be made between Holyfield and Hopkins. Although Hopkins is still top 10 P4P now and Holyfield is nowhere near, they were both fighters who's conditioning, ring intelligence and questionable tactics kept them at the top of the game for a long time.

Funny how people forget. I remember before the Lewis/Tyson fight there were people everywhere saying Tyson was gonna knock Lewis out. Then after the fight it's 'oh, he was shot. It doesn't count,' when in fact, a lot of them are the same people who predicted a Tyson victory. And fair enough. Tyson's only career losses in the 17 years prior to the Lewis fight were in 90 against Douglas and the fights against Holyfield. Obviously Tyson wasn't the same fighter when he fought Lewis but it's laughable to see some of the crap people come out with like 'I could have beaten him that night'. No. Half of the story is usually how well the opposition handled the situation.

But this is how the average, fickel boxing fan takes their own personal slant on events in order to suit an argument.

For an indication of how meritable a victory is, try to remember (or research) what the climate was like BEFORE the fight took place and measure the victory against what those expectactions were. It's the easiest thing in the world to say someone was shot AFTER the event. If you had any real knowledge of the situation and any balls, you'd have made that statement before the fight, not after it.

Another good post, im out of green unfortnately, ill hit you up tomorrow

[Shazam!]

Another good post, im out of green unfortnately, ill hit you up tomorrow

Heh, no worries man

[CarlosG815]

Why hasn't Sonnyboy responded to this thread? Did you block him? Is it because it hurts you and Shazam! when you hear the first hand truth of Lennox Lewis' career?

Why don't you just start a Lennox Lewis fan site and only allow people who love him as much as you to post and you can all have a Lewis orgy.

[CarlosG815]

Is this the best you can argue? Why dont you present your case instead of nitpicking?

Jones can claim a 40 year old McCallum as a great win, but Lewis cant have Holyfield? Isnt this the Holyfield that had just beaten Mike twice?

I'm tired of rehashing the same old argument with you and your boyfriend Shazam!. Holyfield, regardless of how great he was capable of performing in his condition, was for the most part a sliding fighter but was still capable of having historical nights. Just shows how good he was. Tyson was a bum in 2002 (and still took the great Lennox 8 rounds), and the only reason anybody knew who McCall was is because he upset Lewis, so for Lewis to beat him, like he should have the first time, is not a glorious win, regardless of what your deluded mind may tell you. Morrison who? Give me a break, man.

Jones accomplished more than many fighters could ever dream of, and for you to compare underachiever of the century, over rated, bum beater, contender ducking Lewis to the great Roy Jones Jr tells me and everybody here that you're just a delusional fanboy who has no idea what he's talking about, who would rather defend his favorite fighter until death than face reality.

Here's an idea. Next time you're horny for Lewis, don't come to this site and post, just go to the bathroom and rub one out. :wank:

Once you get all your lust for Lennox out, you will be able to think with a more clear head - the one on your shoulders, not the one in your pants.

[them_apples]

I think Lewis, due to the fact that Roy has spent the last third of his career as a fringe contender type fighter. And when you evaluate a persons resume you have to take the bad into account along with the good and unfortnately for Mr Jones there has been a lot of bad since 2003

Roy Jones. He's done terrible lately but that still hasn't tarnished what he did earlier on in his career. He is an ATG who beat other ATG's.

[mickey malone]

Good posts from Shazam..

It's quite obvious from my perspective, Hellboy's overrating is equally as bad as Sonnyboy's underrating of Lewis.. We can all be guilty of letting our hearts rule our heads, and this thread is a typical example..
I don't think Sonny's been excluded.. He knows he only has to sit back to prove his point on this one, as it was an open challenge for Hellboy to post this poll..
Unfortunately for Hellboy, he's fallen for it.. As much as I disagree with Sonny on his reckless overrating of underdogs, I'm afraid he's spot on with this one..
Lewis is by far the better heavyweight, but P4P Jones ranks higher..
However, Hellboy does have a very good argument when it comes to Jones's ducks..
McClellan, Benn, Jackson, Collins, Eubank, Kessler were all avoided by Jones..

[Obama]

I don't think you understand the concept of p4p at all. RJJ was never supposed to be Heavyweight Champion. Lewis on the other hand, Mr. Super Heavyweight, was supposed to beat everyone he faced, and the first god damn time around at that. His two losses easily disqualify him from giving him the benefit of the doubt.