Better resume: Lennox Lewis or Mike Tyson?

[Sugar Adam Ali]

The thing with lewis is that he has so much depth to his resume...

Outside of bowe, byrd, moorer,,, lennox pretty much fought everyone and usually at their peak....

guys like golata, ruddock, grant, vitali were considered top 2 or 3 guys at heavy and lennox crushed them


from 92-02 lennox basically fought every dude that was willing to fight...

then throw in guys like mercer, morrison, bruno, rahman, tua.. the depth of lennox's resume is absurd..

Tyson post ruddock, didn't fight and beat anyone of note... His best win post ruddock is an old damaged bruno, years after mike and lennox had already beaten him...

I love mike, but he rampaged for 3 years, but has nowhere near the depth of lennox, especially if you put each fight into proper context

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Who had Ruddock & Golota beaten before they lost to Lewis?

Holyfield was Robbed in the rematch with Lewis

Ruddock had just gone to war with tyson, and HBO and boxing media was declaring him the uncrowned king when tyson went to prison..
went 19 rds with mike, but didn't last 4 minutes with lennox..

Golata had just destroyed bowe twice ( obviously rid**** won by DQ) and golata was a medalist in the olympics, had just beaten down Bowe, had an outstanding jab and decent power and was clearly way better than seldon, mathis, at the time.. Lennox crushed him in a minute..

Its not that lennox won, its the way he won, in absolute brutal fashion

plus evander should have never even gotten a rematch, lennox was so dominant in the first one... But i do agree that the 2nd holyfield fight could have gone either way.. I don't think it was a robbery, just razor close

[billeau2]

Im with the majority on this one. lewis was in the shadow of Tyson because Mike was so dominant at his best. lewis beat a lot of guys who were subsequently derailed and he often fought them at their best. Lewis was consistant in this regard. He generally fought the guys that everyone thought would cream him....By comparison Vlad seems to perpetually have to convince people about the potential of his opponents because they are professional opponents. Tyson fought skilled men and when he dominated them it indicated how good he was, but Lewis fought better comp.

Guys like Tua, Morrison and Vitali stand out in Lewis' favor....Guys with skills that pay the bills like Mercer, Bruno and golata were often common opponents, and Tyson beat a lot of these guys along with Lewis. of course Holyfield and Razor Ruddock were common opponents as well....But what about guys like Briggs, Grant, Okiwanda, and the other prospects who Lewis gave a shot? This seals the deal for me. Lewis' resume has more quality and range and I am giving no consideration to wins and loses here.

Two fights we have to think of as absurd are Lewis' hollow victory over Tyson and Tyson's hollow victory over Larry holmes. And both men occasionally walked into a hornets nest as well....Buster Douglas, Kevin Mcbride, Oliver Mccall, Rahman.

I think Ray's point about Tyson's style and trajectory have to be considered here: I would not hold the kevin Mcbride type victories against Tyson. When Tyson as done, he was done. BUT it should be pointed out that regarding resumes: lewis avenged his defeats and Olly Mccall is chronically underestimated as a puncher. Man could hit and still can. In my estimation Mccall has to be put in that Orlando Sapeda category....a strong puncher who with lots of loses could still be competative, when driven, against some of the best heavyweights.

[rightsideup]

I voted for Lewis Mike had a more dominate peak but Lennox was easily a more accomplished amateur a two time Olympic fighter. Quarter finalist losing to Biggs at young age than winning the gold. He took a slower road in the professional ranks than Mike but was more capable at an older age than Mike.

[sonnyboyx2]

Ruddock had just gone to war with tyson, and HBO and boxing media was declaring him the uncrowned king when tyson went to prison..
went 19 rds with mike, but didn't last 4 minutes with lennox..

Golata had just destroyed bowe twice ( obviously rid**** won by DQ) and golata was a medalist in the olympics, had just beaten down Bowe, had an outstanding jab and decent power and was clearly way better than seldon, mathis, at the time.. Lennox crushed him in a minute..

Its not that lennox won, its the way he won, in absolute brutal fashion

plus evander should have never even gotten a rematch, lennox was so dominant in the first one... But i do agree that the 2nd holyfield fight could have gone either way.. I don't think it was a robbery, just razor close

You have not answered my question: Who had Ruddock & Golota beaten.

You claim Ruddock went to war with Tyson ?.. Ruddock never won a single round on any of the judges scorecards, not one single round. Ruddock was brutally beat down by Mike Tyson. With the beating so severe in their 2nd fight that Ruddock suffered a broken check-bone and fractured eye-socket. That beating was so bad that it left Ruddock "Damaged Goods" as far as championship level fighting goes.

Andrew Golota had not beaten a single fighter ranked in the world Top 20 He had only fought journeymen and club fighters. Golota was disqualified twice for blatant fouling of the very worse kind in two fights against Rid**** Bowe. Bowe had slipped so badly, that he was a shell of his former self. The beatings Bowe received in his three battles with Holyfield, there for all to see. It was shocking to see just how far Bowe had slipped, with his speach slurred and looking dreadfully out of shape. Yet Golota had to foul, he fouled throughout both fights, so as to save himself time from being knocked out.

Lewis clearly lost his second fight with Evander Holyfield. To claim he won is bias.

Claiming Ruddock & Golota to be the best victories of Lennox Lewis career leaves me thinking, "How can he possibly rated as a ATG Top 10 fighter on those victories.

[beez721]

wow,,,so much one sided nuthugging here on both sides. the fact is there resumes are fairly similar. neither guy beat any atg's on top of there game but they have a good list of some good credible opponents. lennox's is a bit larger and I think his resume is a bit better but its close. end of thread

[sonnyboyx2]

wow,,,so much one sided nuthugging here on both sides. the fact is there resumes are fairly similar. neither guy beat any atg's on top of there game but they have a good list of some good credible opponents. lennox's is a bit larger and I think his resume is a bit better but its close. end of thread

beez... Tyson fought and beat 6 fighters who were the "CURRENT REIGNING HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION OF THE WORLD"..Lewis fought one fighter who was the Current reigning champion and he failed to beat that champion. drawing their first fight and getting the gift decision in their rematch. Now wether you agree or disagree on the outcome of Lewis vs Holyfield 1 & 2. it still leaves Lewis resume light years behind that of Mike Tysons. A boxer cannot progress further in their career or the sport than being the "Reigning Champion of the World".. That means that the boxer is at the very top of their game. No questions can be asked of him...C'mon man, let's be honest here.. its a no brainer!

[jiopsi]

Tyson and it's not close.

[joseph5620]

Maybe you could point out were you deem it to be "Ridiculous and Biased"...

No thank you. I know how you operate and it would be a waste of time.

[sonnyboyx2]

No thank you. I know how you operate and it would be a waste of time.

Well Joseph. Just as i thought, You was talking a load of rubbish and cannot back up what you say.. i knew you would be unable to address my question. because you know what i have said is 100% correct.

Joseph - Put Up or Shut Up...