Comments Thread For: The Greatest Encore: Ranking the Best Heavyweights Since Ali

[Thuglife Nelo]

Damn. I was thinking Rold when I read the headline. Lyle funna be a gangsta too!? I’m widdit!

[Sid-Knee]

Ok so now we are back Holm’s resume. Oddly enough that brings us back to Lennox Lewis resume debate. So let’s run down both of their resumes with HOF fighters which can’t include people over 35 ( since that was the kos debate stand point). Funny enough Holyfield and Tyson were both 35 when they fought Lennox.

Nobody that’s in the HOF is on Lennox resume outside of your scope of rules. I mean Klitschko will be there in time but he isn’t there yet lol. And guess what he barley made it too. Kilts was 32 when he fought Lennox Lmaoo

Well for Holm’s.

Spinks
Spinks
Berbick
Earnie Shavers
Cooney ( I believe )
Ray Mercer ( I believe )
I didn’t include Ali or Norton

As for Lennox once we take away Tyson and Holyfield since they were 35. Lennox resume really doesn’t have any HOF fighters.


Wow this debate really came full circle. Thank you for this. It was like Ali’s rope a dope

I'm not the one who thinks being 35 voids the win. You do. So how can they be "My rules"?? Do you even know which either of us here is writing? I do, but it seems you're confused.

For Lewis, only Holyfield and Tyson are legit HOF'ers. Vitali didn't do enough, even though he's in there.

Holmes did not beat Spinks, so how can that be a win on his resume? Do you even know who Holmes is? Do you know about any of the subjects you're talking about?

Berbick? He's in the HOF? What are you smoking? Berbick was just about good.

Shavers is not a HOF'er. He only had 1 good win, and he didn't even get the decision against Ali. So his record reads as not having a single good win.

Cooney and Mercer? Man, this discussion just gets crazier every time i come back to it. None of these guys are HOF'ers. The Ali win doesn't count. He was shot to pieces and shouldn't have even been in the ring that night. It was a disgrace in letting him go out there. Norton isn't a HOF'er in this life, the next, or any other life either.

The dope part i agree with. Everything else is just grade A madness.

[Removed Now]

I'm not the one who thinks being 35 voids the win. You do. So how can they be "My rules"?? Do you even know which either of us here is writing? I do, but it seems you're confused.

For Lewis, only Holyfield and Tyson are legit HOF'ers. Vitali didn't do enough, even though he's in there.

Holmes did not beat Spinks, so how can that be a win on his resume? Do you even know who Holmes is? Do you know about any of the subjects you're talking about?

Berbick? He's in the HOF? What are you smoking? Berbick was just about good.

Shavers is not a HOF'er. He only had 1 good win, and he didn't even get the decision against Ali. So his record reads as not having a single good win.

Cooney and Mercer? Man, this discussion just gets crazier every time i come back to it. None of these guys are HOF'ers. The Ali win doesn't count. He was shot to pieces and shouldn't have even been in the ring that night. It was a disgrace in letting him go out there. Norton isn't a HOF'er in this life, the next, or any other life either.

The dope part i agree with. Everything else is just grade A madness.

No legit I believe Gerry Cooney is in international hall of fame. I definitely know he’s in the New Jersey boxing hall of fame.

I also know “Puncher Of The Century” Earnie Shavers was enshrined in The Las Vegas Boxing Hall of Fame. Don’t shoot the messager.

I take back the other two. I am on the fence about the Norton part tho.


I don’t discredit a fighter for losing to an elite fighter . I never did. I discredit a person losing to a bum. I look at the overall strength of ones resume. Yes he lost to Spinks but Spinks is a HOF fighters. I don’t care if somebody beats up ok tomato cans and goes undefeated. I respect ppl like Mosley and Dela Hoya who fight all comers. Yes you win and loss but overall they had great resumes and I am not knocking no body that loses to Floyd , prime Trinidad , Prime Pac-Man. Those are once in a life time fighters. Shoot Paulie had one of the most hardest resumes in the game for a person who can’t punch. I definitely will not give somebody credit for fighting an over the hill fighter. Like those Lennox wins over Tyson and Holyfield nope. Just like I didn’t like when Holm’s beat down Ali. However to his credit he told Ali not to take the fight b Ali needed the money and got whipped.

[Sid-Knee]

No legit I believe Gerry Cooney is in international hall of fame. I definitely know he’s in the New Jersey boxing hall of fame.

I also know “Puncher Of The Century” Earnie Shavers was enshrined in The Las Vegas Boxing Hall of Fame. Don’t shoot the messager.

I take back the other two. I am on the fence about the Norton part tho.


I don’t discredit a fighter for losing to an elite fighter . I never did. I discredit a person losing to a bum. I look at the overall strength of ones resume. Yes he lost to Spinks but Spinks is a HOF fighters. I don’t care if somebody beats up ok tomato cans and goes undefeated. I respect ppl like Mosley and Dela Hoya who fight all comers. Yes you win and loss but overall they had great resumes and I am not knocking no body that loses to Floyd , prime Trinidad , Prime Pac-Man. Those are once in a life time fighters. Shoot Paulie had one of the most hardest resumes in the game for a person who can’t punch. I definitely will not give somebody credit for fighting an over the hill fighter. Like those Lennox wins over Tyson and Holyfield nope. Just like I didn’t like when Holm’s beat down Ali. However to his credit he told Ali not to take the fight b Ali needed the money and got whipped.

That is not the IBHOF. They're naff ones that don't count. Holmes never beat anyone better than a good fighter.

Spinks was a Lightheavy though, so there's a big difference there.

Holyfield was 36 while Lewis was 34. It was an ATG win over a great fighter of the time. From the Tyson fight till the Lewis rematch for Holyfield, it was the most consistent and best point at Heavy for him.

You criticize Lewis for losing to Rahman even though he was at his heaviest and didn't turn up in Africa until a week before the fight, therefore not getting used to the altitude. But how old was Lewis then? You're contradicting yourself again and being a hypocrite.

Ali wasn't shot when Holmes fought him. He was well beyond that. To claim Tyson or Holyfield were in the same place is beyond ridiculous.

I don't come down hard if a fighter loses to a top fighter. It's all about who they beat. Nearly everyone in history has lost, and more than once. So it hasn't got anything to do with just losing.

[Sid-Knee]

Ok. Let’s agree to disagree. Even though Spinks is voted among the best heavyweights.

I am not contradicting my self. Rahmen was the 36-1 underdog. Ok Lennox Lewis was 36 when he lost. Ok. I don’t value Rahmen as a high value fighter anyway. So Lennox age isn’t playing any factors for your stand point.

Mike Tyson mentally wasn’t mentally there and we all know it. We can just Disagree on that.

I always said Ali was shot of beyond shot. I never referenced that win as a good thing neither does Holm’s.

Only people who don't know anything of any importance where boxing is concerned would ever claim Spinks to be one of the best Heavies in history. He isn't. And it's not even close.

The age of Lennox is clearly important when you're the one who makes that claim. You're contradicting yourself all over the place and being a hypocrite when you say otherwise.

Tyson was there mentally. He wasn't at his best, but he was there mentally. But i've heard one too many excuses for Tyson to even care at this point.

Rahman was a good fighter. I'm not claiming him to be one of the greats or anything. He was world class. He proved it. He's better than most of those Holmes beat. You only have to check the resumes of his opponents to know this. Fan boying won't change that.