Lennox Lewis vs Evander Holyfield - Who should be considered greatest?

[Suckmedry]

^^^suprised u didn't argue lewis to make vitali look better boy

[beez721]

So these two fighters were undoubtedly the two best fighters of the 90s era - or at least the two who made it out on top.

Even though they had a huge unification fight at the end of that decade, it was an old, inactive Holyfield who if we're honest, hadn't looked the same after his trilogy with Bowe which took a lot out of him.

His punch output had gone down dramatically, and the wear and tear of a very very tough career had begun to take its toll.

He was basically fighting a close to prime Lennox Lewis, not too far removed from career best performance vs Golota where he really looked great. Lennox though, did have a couple of indifferent performances vs Mavrovic, Briggs and Akinwande and it could easily be argued that he also was looking at the beginning of the end of his career.

When discussing these two fighters and their careers, I feel the deciding factor in the discussion usually centers around their two fights where Lennox won (though the second fight was very close).

At the time, I think most people considered Holyfield to be the supreme fighter of the 90s, whereas it seems as time has passed, that Lewis has taken that mantel.

Who should be ranked higher and why?

lennox should be ranked higher based on resume but I think holyfield was a much better fighter pound for pound. I also think a younger evander would have beaten lewis in a tough close fight. he was well past it and gave lewis a fairly rough time in the rematch. I think hed have out worked lennox

[Mugwump]

Heres my case for Lewis: a lot of guys he beat were, before he beat them, considered monsters. Briggs, GOlata, Ruddock, Morrison, Grant, etc... And Lewis beat them all...He also beat Vitali, so the argument regarding his comp is baloney. lewis got it done with a great punch, a solid d and a real thinking man's approach to the sweet science. His comp on the whole was better than Evander's, he beat evander, and a lot of guys he fought would have been a lot better if they had not run into him.

Can't argue with the above summary. It's easy to re-write history retrospectively to suit an argument - but I remember Lewis entering the ring against Golota, Vitali and Grant (especially) with many bookmakers guessing that Lennox was about to meet his match.

Even Lewis' "second tier" opponents - such as Tua, Bruno and Briggs carried the kind of turn-a-fight-on-its-head threat which you rarely see today. Hell, Lewis' journeymen fighters could **** (Rahman).

And let's not forget Ray Mercer (whose amateur pedigree was unquestionable) fought the battle of his life giving Lewis kittens in the process. At the bell I don't think it's unreasonable to guess Lewis was wishing Mercer took all his opponents as seriously.

And he beat Evander twice with plenty to spare. Indeed, I recall Manny ****ing the apron in utter frustration in the first from round six because Lewis ... being Lewis ... took absolutely no notice of his trainer's pleading to starch Holyfield early and get the hell out.

Given Holyfield's achievements at lower weights (not to mention his longevity) I have no problem with the argument that he *might* be the better boxer.

But a better heavy? No way.

[billeau2]

Can't argue with the above summary. It's easy to re-write history retrospectively to suit an argument - but I remember Lewis entering the ring against Golota, Vitali and Grant (especially) with many bookmakers guessing that Lennox was about to meet his match.

Even Lewis' "second tier" opponents - such as Tua, Bruno and Briggs carried the kind of turn-a-fight-on-its-head threat which you rarely see today. Hell, Lewis' journeymen fighters could **** (Rahman).

And let's not forget Ray Mercer (whose amateur pedigree was unquestionable) fought the battle of his life giving Lewis kittens in the process. At the bell I don't think it's unreasonable to guess Lewis was wishing Mercer took all his opponents as seriously.

And he beat Evander twice with plenty to spare. Indeed, I recall Manny ****ing the apron in utter frustration in the first from round six because Lewis ... being Lewis ... took absolutely no notice of his trainer's pleading to starch Holyfield early and get the hell out.

Given Holyfield's achievements at lower weights (not to mention his longevity) I have no problem with the argument that he *might* be the better boxer.

But a better heavy? No way.

Thats a great and creative distinction, between boxer and heavyweight.

[young_robbed]

Well - the fact that Lewis fought an older Holyfield definitely needs to be considered. I don't know if Lewis could have beaten a prime, mid 90s Holyfield. It's a tough call, chances are Holyfield could have legitimately snatched a win if that happens (given how close the second fight was)

Lewis was more dominant at heavyweight. He came around at a time where Holyfield was past his best, Bowe didn't wanna fight him, Tyson was past it, and the other 90s heavyweights very obviously weren't in their class.

What I WILL say is that none of Holyfield's losses (when he was still a respectable HW - fûck the 2000s shìt) are as bad as Lewis getting croaked by Rahman and McCall. Losing to Bowe & Lewis himself is a lot more excusable. I didn't think he really lost to Moorer, but it was obvious that was an off performance for him and he proved it in the rematch.

Now, in a pound for pound sense, Holyfield is the greater fighter. He came up from Light heavyweight and cruiserweight to become one of the greatest heavyweight champs ever. He was almost always at a size disadvantage at heavyweight - comparatively speaking, Lewis almost always had that advantage.

My top 10 heavyweight list goes like this:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Foreman
5. Lewis
6. Holyfield
7. Frazier
8. Liston
9. Tyson
10. Marciano

So there are close in my opinion - Lewis' dominance does it for me.

[Elroy1]

Lb for lb, Lewis cannot compete with Holyfield.

H2H, Holyfield could never beat Lewis. He cannot out-box him, and he doesn't have the big one shot power of the 2 guys that did stop Lewis.

[- Ram Raid -]

The fact that the cornerstone of Holyfied's heavyweight career was the use of human growth hormone and other banned substances unfortunately renders the question null and void for me. Which is a shame because he was a damn fine boxer.

[Elroy1]

The fact that the cornerstone of Holyfied's heavyweight career was the use of human growth hormone and other banned substances unfortunately renders the question null and void for me. Which is a shame because he was a damn fine boxer.

Agreed.

Holyfield for me is the best CW in history.

As a HW his record is 26-10. Lewis's is 42-2.

This is probably the toughest pill to swallow also..

Holyfield fought the opponents that were BENEATH Lewis to fight mainly!

There is little real question between Holy and Lew really.

[billeau2]

Well - the fact that Lewis fought an older Holyfield definitely needs to be considered. I don't know if Lewis could have beaten a prime, mid 90s Holyfield. It's a tough call, chances are Holyfield could have legitimately snatched a win if that happens (given how close the second fight was)

Lewis was more dominant at heavyweight. He came around at a time where Holyfield was past his best, Bowe didn't wanna fight him, Tyson was past it, and the other 90s heavyweights very obviously weren't in their class.

What I WILL say is that none of Holyfield's losses (when he was still a respectable HW - fûck the 2000s shìt) are as bad as Lewis getting croaked by Rahman and McCall. Losing to Bowe & Lewis himself is a lot more excusable. I didn't think he really lost to Moorer, but it was obvious that was an off performance for him and he proved it in the rematch.

Now, in a pound for pound sense, Holyfield is the greater fighter. He came up from Light heavyweight and cruiserweight to become one of the greatest heavyweight champs ever. He was almost always at a size disadvantage at heavyweight - comparatively speaking, Lewis almost always had that advantage.

My top 10 heavyweight list goes like this:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Foreman
5. Lewis
6. Holyfield
7. Frazier
8. Liston
9. Tyson
10. Marciano

So there are close in my opinion - Lewis' dominance does it for me.

I find that a lot of Holly fans cherry pick which Evander was in the house to explain his losses. While one can do this with Tyson because he was so dominant, I do not think this flies with Hollyfield. In this post you essentially explained away his losses. First off, Moorer beat Holygield that first fight and came in out of condition the second fight. Second, I find it strange that nobody talks about Lewis sometimes being unprepared....I.e. "a prime lewis would have beat the crap out of Vitali, instead of a Lewis that was preparing to fight Kirk Johnson."

Holyfield, to be considered a great heavy simply has to have some range in the division, otherwise he beat Bowe, a guy who some, like myself, thought was inferior to Lewis and overrated.

[soul_survivor]

Holyfield, both at heavyweight and in terms of ranking P4P ATGness. It's close but Holyfield has the better resume, better wins over prime or close to prime opponents, that version of Tyson which Holyfield faced was still a monster. He wasn't the tame duck looking for a way out which is what Lewis basically beat up on some years later. We forget that Holyfield was an underdog for so long in his career and continuously came out on top against very high level competitors.