Ranking Floyd Patterson Above Lennox Lewis, Can It Be Justified?

[Greatest1942]

Ali was heavyweight champion of the world too. Did Lewis duck him as well? Actually, don't answer that.

Right, so you slate Lewis for facing an old Holyfield and Tyson yet he should have faced even older fighters like Foreman, Witherspoon, Holmes and Bonecrusher (!!). You slate Lewis for fighting mediocre opponents yet he should have faced Ruiz, Hide and Brewster. He can't win. As for Bowe and Moorer, you can't fight guys who avoid you.



Do you think it was a worthy title fight?



Yes you do. You make ludicrous attacks on some fighters and bizarre excuses for others. What would you say if Lewis fought someone whose pro record going into the fight was 0-0-0? I think I can guess. Bowe was stripped of his title for refusing to face his #1 contender Lewis and you have a ton of excuses for that. It's obvious you have a major dislike of Lewis for some reason. You have a ready-made excuse for every single fight of his and your list of fighters he supposedly ducked is laughable. By the way, you forgot Roy Jones. Bonecrusher? Witherspoon? Hide? Brewster? lol lol

Agreed about the Lewis competition.

Look Lewis had to unify the titles where as Patterson got it that way, look at the circumstances please. Lewis beat everybody he faced at least once. Patterson got beat by the best he faced, and if I might say so Patterson's title run was not very impressive vs Lewis.

[sonnyboyx2]

Agreed about the Lewis competition.

Look Lewis had to unify the titles where as Patterson got it that way, look at the circumstances please. Lewis beat everybody he faced at least once. Patterson got beat by the best he faced, and if I might say so Patterson's title run was not very impressive vs Lewis.

Lewis never had a title run... he lost the belt he got out of the garbage can when getting poleaxed by the journeyman Oliver McCall.. Lewis then wanted nothing to do with any of the champions who held the linear title throughout the 1990s Holyfield, Bowe, Foreman, Holmes, Moorer or Tyson yet offeres were made to Lewis during that period to face these champions... Lewis then won back the WBC belt in a farcical affair against Drug abuser Oliver McCall then had 2 fights with Evander Holyfield for the Undisputed Title drawing the first (Lewis should have won) and being very fortunate to get the verdict in the rematch, yet Lewis then abrogated his responsibilities as champion by his refusal to fight the No1 contenders so was stripped of every belt as well as losing 2 belts when poleaxed by a mediocre journeyman in Hasim Rahman before winning them back in a return bout.. The fact is that Lewis was nothing more than a pretender who only ever held a vacant belt and when faced with the opportunity to be undisputed champion he was not good enough to hold the title..... Face up to the facts instead of trying to make a case that simply is not there to be made, Floyd Patterson fought in the toughest era in heavyweight history and was a 2 times undisputed champion and very unlucky not to be a 3 times champion and to claim it was easier to win the title back in the late 50s early 60s than it is today is farcical just like it is to claim Lewis beat every man he ever got in the ring with.

[Sugarj]

Looks like this thread is really going to liven up.

All I'm going to say is that I think Patterson was technically superior to Lewis by a fair margin.

[sonnyboyx2]

Looks like this thread is really going to liven up.

All I'm going to say is that I think Patterson was technically superior to Lewis by a fair margin.

Muhammad Ali said,"Patterson was the best boxer he ever fought"

[Greatest1942]

Lewis never had a title run... he lost the belt he got out of the garbage can when getting poleaxed by the journeyman Oliver McCall.. Lewis then wanted nothing to do with any of the champions who held the linear title throughout the 1990s Holyfield, Bowe, Foreman, Holmes, Moorer or Tyson yet offeres were made to Lewis during that period to face these champions... Lewis then won back the WBC belt in a farcical affair against Drug abuser Oliver McCall then had 2 fights with Evander Holyfield for the Undisputed Title drawing the first (Lewis should have won) and being very fortunate to get the verdict in the rematch, yet Lewis then abrogated his responsibilities as champion by his refusal to fight the No1 contenders so was stripped of every belt as well as losing 2 belts when poleaxed by a mediocre journeyman in Hasim Rahman before winning them back in a return bout.. The fact is that Lewis was nothing more than a pretender who only ever held a vacant belt and when faced with the opportunity to be undisputed champion he was not good enough to hold the title..... Face up to the facts instead of trying to make a case that simply is not there to be made, Floyd Patterson fought in the toughest era in heavyweight history and was a 2 times undisputed champion and very unlucky not to be a 3 times champion and to claim it was easier to win the title back in the late 50s early 60s than it is today is farcical just like it is to claim Lewis beat every man he ever got in the ring with.

He fought in the toughest era of heavy weights so did Machen, cooper ,London ,Folley, and got beat. Moore said the Patterson fight was the worst performance of his carrer.

Patterson lost to Ali 2x. To Sonny Liston 2x (first round blowouts). Lost to Johannsson once. He met the best but he never beat the best. Why should I allow him to be ranked higher just because he got Humilated by Ali in the first fight and ****ed up by Liston in 1 round in both fights. What is your criteria getting beat is okay as long asit is Ali,Liston, Johannson eh? Lewis avenged his loses atleast and was good enough to beat some greats of his era too.

Lewis beat Tyson,Holyfield, Mercer,, Bruno, Klit et all. You can dissect every man's carrer like you do Lewis's. I can dissect Patterson's title reign too. Its ridiculous. Anyways forget it you can deride Lewis as much as you want few will believe you.

As for Sugraj Patterson might have been better techinically than Lewis which I can dispute someother time, but Lewis was no slouch there too plus he was bigger far bigger than Patterson ever was. Natural size does play a role.

And morever we are discussing careers here, and I don't beleive Patterson's is so far ahead that it completely blows Lewis's out of water, unless you are extermely biased.

[sonnyboyx2]

He fought in the toughest era of heavy weights so did Machen, cooper ,London ,Folley, and got beat. Moore said the Patterson fight was the worst performance of his carrer.

Patterson lost to Ali 2x. To Sonny Liston 2x (first round blowouts). Lost to Johannsson once. He met the best but he never beat the best. Why should I allow him to be ranked higher just because he got Humilated by Ali in the first fight and ****ed up by Liston in 1 round in both fights. What is your criteria getting beat is okay as long asit is Ali,Liston, Johannson eh? Lewis avenged his loses atleast and was good enough to beat some greats of his era too.

Lewis beat Tyson,Holyfield, Mercer,, Bruno, Klit et all. You can dissect every man's carrer like you do Lewis's. I can dissect Patterson's title reign too. Its ridiculous. Anyways forget it you can deride Lewis as much as you want few will believe you.

As for Sugraj Patterson might have been better techinically than Lewis which I can dispute someother time, but Lewis was no slouch there too plus he was bigger far bigger than Patterson ever was. Natural size does play a role.

And morever we are discussing careers here, and I don't beleive Patterson's is so far ahead that it completely blows Lewis's out of water, unless you are extermely biased.

i ain't saying Patterson never lost to Ali (twice) Liston (twice) and Johansson. what i am saying is that he fought in a very good era of boxing and was a 2 times undisputed champion as well as beating some very good fighters in that period, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Machen, Johansson who was all at the top of their game unlike Tyson, Holyfield & Bruno when Lewis beat them... it is not and never has been a case of me dissecting the career of Lennox Lewis it has always been me telling how Lewis career unfolded.

now we are well into this argument and i have made many posts on the topic so what is it that i have said which you do not agree with?... list them down for me so that i can address these things which you do not agree with which i have said about Lewis because it is pointless us going back and forward as i seem to be going over and over what i have already said previously, so please list down from my posts exactly what it is that you disagree with that i have said.

[Greatest1942]

i ain't saying Patterson never lost to Ali (twice) Liston (twice) and Johansson. what i am saying is that he fought in a very good era of boxing and was a 2 times undisputed champion as well as beating some very good fighters in that period, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Machen, Johansson who was all at the top of their game unlike Tyson, Holyfield & Bruno when Lewis beat them... it is not and never has been a case of me dissecting the career of Lennox Lewis it has always been me telling how Lewis career unfolded.

now we are well into this argument and i have made many posts on the topic so what is it that i have said which you do not agree with?... list them down for me so that i can address these things which you do not agree with which i have said about Lewis because it is pointless us going back and forward as i seem to be going over and over what i have already said previously, so please list down from my posts exactly what it is that you disagree with that i have said.

I disagree that Patterson's resume completely overshadows Lewis.

I disagree that Patterson was a better heavyweight , more skilled yea, but Lewis was bigger and stronger.

I think Lewis ranks ahead of Patterson. IBRO ranks him in top 15where as Patterson is unranked. I have not seen Floyd in too many top 10, top 20 lists, while I have seen Lewis a lot of times.It does say something doesn't it?

But if you disagree its okay. You are a rarety here,but it doesn't matter. We have all our views.

[sonnyboyx2]

I disagree that Patterson's resume completely overshadows Lewis.

I disagree that Patterson was a better heavyweight , more skilled yea, but Lewis was bigger and stronger.

I think Lewis ranks ahead of Patterson. IBRO ranks him in top 15where as Patterson is unranked. I have not seen Floyd in too many top 10, top 20 lists, while I have seen Lewis a lot of times.It does say something doesn't it?

But if you disagree its okay. You are a rarety here,but it doesn't matter. We have all our views.

i have never claimed Patterson's resume "Completely overshadows Lewis" nor have i said he was a better heavyweight.. the Topic asked can a case be made to rank Patterson ahead of Lewis... Yes a case can be made.

Lewis i see in almost every Top 10 made by young posters as the No1, 2 or 3 All time greatest Heavyweight which is laughable.... Many boxing historian do not have Lewis in their Top 20 Heavyweight List and i have never seen him ranked higher than No15 as far as resume goes it is my opinion that Patterson's is better than Lewis resume and that Pattersons overall championship reign is superior in every way than what Lewis title reign was.

i was hoping that you would call into question some of the many things i said about the career of Lennox Lewis but you did not. so i take it that you are in agreement with everything i have stated in regard to the career of Lewis.

[Kid McCoy]

i was disappointed Lewis never fought Ruiz... Ruiz had been a sparring partner for Lewis in 1994 when he came over to London to fight Julius Francis and Lewis was training to fight McCall, Lewis found it almost impossible to handle the "Grappling-Hook" style of Ruiz in sparring and on the second day of training Ruiz dropped Lewis in the gym twice in 3rds, the Lewis camp got rid of John Ruiz services the next day...over the next 5yrs Ruiz fought himself into the No1 position for Lewis world title but Lewis wanted nothing to do with the man he knew he could not handle.

i could tell you about The Lewis v Lamon Brewster sparring session in 2000 but will keep that for another day because you will be shocked.

i totally disagree with you in that Lewis best wins was better than Patterson's best wins and that Lewis had the better more dominant career...are you seriously trying to make a case that Lewis was the dominant champion of the world with his prized WBC strap between 1992 to 1999 ?

Rid**** Bowe was the man from 92 to 93 when he lost it back to Holyfield who then lost to Moorer in 94 who lost to Foreman at the end of 94 with Foreman being champion to late 97

Lewis picked a belt out of the garbage can in 93 lost it in 94 then fought for a vacant belt against a guy coming out of a drug-rehab in 97 then fought a draw for the undisputed title in 99 (should have won).. He then got the decision for the undisputed title in late 99 in a rematch yet most at ringside thought he had lost. Lewis then refused to fight the No1 contenders so was stripped of the WBA belt, he then got poleaxed by a journeyman whom he handpicked to fight and regained 2 belts by winning a rematch, Lewis was then stripped of the IBF belt for refusing to fight their No1 contender. Lewis then beat a shell of Mike Tyson who was more than 12yrs past his best and had served several lengthy prison sentences. Lewis struggled to hold on to his final belt in a controversial fight with Vitali Klitschko with Lewis announcing his retirement from the sport only days before he was to be stripped of his last belt.... and you call that DOMINANT

Floyd was only dominant was under D'Amato's careful matchmaking, which probably extended his reign by a few years. For someone who trashes Lewis for everything, I'm amazed how you excuse Patterson giving a title shot to someone who'd never had a pro fight. When he did start taking on top heavyweights his record is uneven and is 0-4 against his two best opponents. By your reckoning, Patterson must also be a better heavyweight than Liston since he won more title fights and also regained the title. No matter that Liston had better wins from 56-61 than Patterson did. Title fights skew the picture when the champion doesn't meet the best contenders. Sam Langford never won a title fight in his life but was much better than many who did.

It's hard to be dominant when top fighters avoid you, but Lewis still has good wins from that period over Ruddock, Mercer, Bruno, Golota, Briggs (by your reckoning the real champ after getting the decision against Foreman) etc which he capped off by unifying the division with Holyfield and then beating the likes of Tua and Klitschko. Yes I know you have an excuse for why Lewis doesn't deserve credit for any win in his career, but there's a reason why your opinion is a minority one. I could make similar excuses for all of Floyd's wins, but since I don't have a huge problem with Floyd like you do with Lewis, I won't bother.

I'd say Ruiz' mandatory position had a lot more to do with being a King fighter than anything he'd done in the ring. Look at that opponent list... Fernely Feliz, Mario Cawley, Ray Anis and a 40 year old Tony Tucker who you deride Lewis for fighting five years previously. Fought his way to the no.1 position? You have to be kidding. Lewis vacated his belt to face Grant, ranked #1 and seen as the next top American heavyweight. That was the big fight HBO were heavily hyping and he chose that over an obscure fighter who got to the top through King/WBA machinations. The same machinations that kept him the WBA's mandatory challenger for the next five years win, lose or draw.

I see you ignored my mention of the IBRO's rating. Not long ago you were telling everyone that Robinson had to be rated over Langford because experts like those at the IBRO said so. Well, the same experts think Lewis was a better heavyweight than Patterson.

[Sugarj]

Muhammad Ali said,"Patterson was the best boxer he ever fought"

I've heard that too, Patterson would have made that 1965 match a damn sight closer without that back injury.

The 1972 fight showcased even a much faded Patterson's true ability against Ali.