Why didn’t Lewis and Rahman fight for a third time?

[sentax]

I'm curious why they didn’t fight a third time? The first fight was one sided (in Rahman's favor), as was the second (in Lewis' favor).

Seems like a third fight would have been inevitable.Why no trilogy to settle it?

[Toffee]

Lennox was approaching 37. There's no need for trilogies at that point.

It's about money and defining fights. Tyson was a more obvious choice.

And of course, the champ had no contractual requirement to fight Rahman again.

[HitmanTommy]

[sentax]

1-1

Wilder-Fury is arguably 2-0 Fury and they're gonna fight a 3rd time.

[QueensburyRules]

I'm curious why they didn’t fight a third time? The first fight was one sided (in Rahman's favor), as was the second (in Lewis' favor).

Seems like a third fight would have been inevitable.Why no trilogy to settle it?

- -U skip U periods again?

[ShaneMosleySr]

Lewis was the champion before the first and he won his title back in dramatic fashion.

If it was a split decision they probably would have fought again.

[famicommander]

Rahman had a string of tough luck right after that fight:
-Split TD loss to Holyfield after an accidental headbutt left Rahman unable to continue
-Split draw to David Tua in a fight I personally scored for Rahman
-ugly but competitive UD loss to John Ruiz in an interim title fight

Probably not that attractive of a fight at the end of Lewis' career. Instead he fought Tyson and Klitschko for big money and called it a career.

But Rahman did go 6-0-1 over his next 7 and get the WBC Heavyweight Title back, so good on him for recovering after that string of tough luck after the Lewis KO.