i think lennox could beat ali.. lennox= greatest HW ever?

[Greatest1942]

Try Poet vs a dude who worships a crank historian who rides the bandwagon of whoever is on top at any given time.....and who hangs on that crank historians every word even when it flies in the face of the concensus of boxing historians as collective whole.

Or how about Poet vs someone who thinks Lennox beats every Heavyweight in history.....'cuz he's big.

Or maybe Poet vs someone who allows his personal antipathy towards Ali cloud his judgement and who can't distinguish between his personal biases and reality.

Poet

Poet honestly if you and Hank mentioned something I will give more consideration to hank since he knows more than boxing than you do. I dont agree with a lot of his comments but i respect him.

FYI Lennox is not in my top 10, just outside it. I do think most greats beat him including Ali. But I give him a chance against any body because he does have some abilities, besides size. If size was all Wlad or Vitali would have been greatest.

I dont suck Ali's nuts so much like some do, that I think he is unbeatable. Hell teh guy was troubled by lesser guys than Lennox.

As I told , you can ridicule any one but your arguement doesnt carry weight.

[GJC]

Interesting thread. Poet stay calm and don't get personal you have enough knowledge to not have to resort to that my friend. You lose focus and don't do yourself any favours.
One point I'd make is don't you find that it's almost pointless to quote historians? By that I mean we will gravitate to the opinion that confirms our own bias. I.e. "Sugar is a complete idiot but obviously even he is right about that"!
Also historians of all types have to push boundaries and proffer alternative opinions. If they didn't then 99.9% would be unread given that in most cases the facts are undisputed. I.e. The Atom bomb was dropped on a certain day, Louis beat Schmelling in the first round in 38 etc etc

[Greatest1942]

Interesting thread. Poet stay calm and don't get personal you have enough knowledge to not have to resort to that my friend. You lose focus and don't do yourself any favours.
One point I'd make is don't you find that it's almost pointless to quote historians? By that I mean we will gravitate to the opinion that confirms our own bias. I.e. "Sugar is a complete idiot but obviously even he is right about that"!
Also historians of all types have to push boundaries and proffer alternative opinions. If they didn't then 99.9% would be unread given that in most cases the facts are undisputed. I.e. The Atom bomb was dropped on a certain day, Louis beat Schmelling in the first round in 38 etc etc

I agree 100 % that historians some times makes wrong comments. Monte says a lot of things that I dont agree with...But that doesn't make him an idiot...

If you read back you will see that I quoted Hank to say that I am not the only one who thinks Lewis had a great right hand...Is it wrong? ...The whole point of arguing is to come up with supporting evidence...And then I drop into whether Hank is an idiot or not or stuff like that. Its moronic.Is it right to call a well respected knowledgeable man an idiot just because he said so and so which does not coincide with my views...Its asinine.

I have noticed when ever Poet does not win any argument he just resorts to ugly barbs or personal insults...It is good for new bies for whom he might have too much knowledge...honestly with me it doesn't sit well...because I do have an honest opinion I know as well as him the history of this sport...May be better.

I do believe Poet worships Ali too much... Thats why when Hank said Tyson had a better defense than Ali ( unjust in my opinion ) , it upset him. Anyways its wasting time.

[Mugwump]

I agree 100 % that historians some times makes wrong comments. Monte says a lot of things that I dont agree with...But that doesn't make him an idiot...

If you read back you will see that I quoted Hank to say that I am not the only one who thinks Lewis had a great right hand...Is it wrong?

I don't think there's any doubt Lewis had an excellent right hand. The only criticism I'd offer is that he didn't use it often enough.

[Greatest1942]

I don't think there's any doubt Lewis had an excellent right hand. The only criticism I'd offer is that he didn't use it often enough.

Whilst I do not rate it as the best ever as hank does (just clarifying ) , I also think it was great.

You are right he did not use it as often as he may be should have.

[McGoorty]

i think lennox is the greatest heavyweight the world has ever seen... (yes better then the klitschkos, im a klitschko fan.. and even i know lennox is superior to both brothers)

he could of probably dominated the 70s.... he would of beat ali, foreman, etc. etc.

he just fought in the weak era, like the klits....

MARVIN HART,BEST Heavyweight EVER !!!!!!!!!!!

[McGoorty]

MARVIN HART,BEST Heavyweight EVER !!!!!!!!!!!

I Don't believe he said that.

[StarshipTrooper]

Interesting thread. Poet stay calm and don't get personal you have enough knowledge to not have to resort to that my friend. You lose focus and don't do yourself any favours.
One point I'd make is don't you find that it's almost pointless to quote historians? By that I mean we will gravitate to the opinion that confirms our own bias. I.e. "Sugar is a complete idiot but obviously even he is right about that"!
Also historians of all types have to push boundaries and proffer alternative opinions. If they didn't then 99.9% would be unread given that in most cases the facts are undisputed. I.e. The Atom bomb was dropped on a certain day, Louis beat Schmelling in the first round in 38 etc etc

Oh I'm quite calm.....despite the best efforts of the "gentleman" (I use that term VERY loosely here) in question attempting to make the issue about me inside of the subject at hand. I have, in fact, been asked nicely by another poster to ignore his cheap attempts at baiting me for the sake of keeping the peace in this section.

Poet

[Mintcar923]

George Foreman is an ATG who had fought Ali, Norton, Frazier, etc.. He had also said that Lennox was the GOAT after Lewis-Tyson so I think Lewis belongs up there with the best. He did beat every man he ever faced.. Even though the Holyfield he beat looked like Olyfield; and the Tyson he beat fought in slow motion like he gobbled some serious meds!

[GJC]

I have noticed when ever Poet does not win any argument he just resorts to ugly barbs or personal insults...It is good for new bies for whom he might have too much knowledge...honestly with me it doesn't sit well...because I do have an honest opinion I know as well as him the history of this sport...May be better.

I do believe Poet worships Ali too much... Thats why when Hank said Tyson had a better defense than Ali ( unjust in my opinion ) , it upset him. Anyways its wasting time.

Poet's actually a Louis worshipper if anything but he does take the personal bias out of his opinions probably better than I do.
Poet isn't everyone's cup of tea but although I believe he has dreadful taste in music, we darn't discuss politics as I'm sure he has me down as a closet pinko and I find his under appreciation of Willie Pep bewieldering he is a good friend. He argues a case passionately, no bad thing, but can get carried away which isn't always a good thing. I make no secret to him that he makes me wince at times. That said he has great integrity a good heart and very good boxing knowledge, as do you. I hope you both agree to disagree and move on and both continue to make valuble contributions in here.
Touch gloves and move on gents.