Was Lennox Lewis a great champion ?

[Brockton Lip]

Please tell me how you can rip ali's resume apart? Can you actually name 1 heavyweight with a better resume than ali's.

Nope, but I can still rip it apart and thats my point. It can be argued that he received gift decisions, ducked opponents, lost to opponents that he should not have, had trouble with opponents that he shouldn't have, etc. Its been said before.

[brownpimp88]

a prime holyfield just like tyson and bowe avoided lewis until he had to fight him

u tell them buddy, lennox is top 5, no doubt about it. Hell sometimes i even rank him #2. I mean what gives joe louis the right to be #2. Cuz he beat a bunch of ****ty ass champs during the worst era of heavyweight history from 1924-1936. Baer, braddock, sharkey, the freak carnera, lol who are these cans.

[K-Nan]

a prime holyfield just like tyson and bowe avoided lewis until he had to fight him

Lewis was on track to a title shot with Holy until he got put down by Mccall. After that, he had the Trilogy with Bowe, so when was he avoiding him?

[brownpimp88]

Nope, but I can still rip it apart and thats my point. It can be argued that he received gift decisions, ducked opponents, lost to opponents that he should not have, had trouble with opponents that he shouldn't have, etc. Its been said before.

even robinson's resume can be ripped apart but its all meaningless cuz you can never name a guy with a superior resume. Lennox has easily accomplished more than liston, huh i thought this isnt head to head matchups. Liston isnt exactly what i call a big success.

[brownpimp88]

Lewis was on track to a title shot with Holy until he got put down by Mccall. After that, he had the Trilogy with Bowe, so when was he avoiding him?

holy wasnt the champ at that time, nice try there.

[Brockton Lip]

u tell them buddy, lennox is top 5, no doubt about it. Hell sometimes i even rank him #2. I mean what gives joe louis the right to be #2. Cuz he beat a bunch of ****ty ass champs during the worst era of heavyweight history from 1924-1936. Baer, braddock, sharkey, the freak carnera, lol who are these cans.

Wow...lol. Ignorant and disrespectful. Its a shame because you have knowledge of eras and fighters, but you seem to have no ability to judge fighters. Your knowledge is your strength and your ignorance, you think boxing is all about numbers and resumes; thats a shame.

[ben41193]

lennox was an awsome champion. Not an atg but he was "deffanatly" an "Awsome" Champ lol

[BigCol]

Brownpimp, you've really gotta know how to judge great.

Me, I put a lot of merit, into where a fighters opponent is, in his given career. I have a huge amount of credit go to a fighter, if he beats another great fighter, in what i would call "the heart of his prime". Or when a fighter is on a long winning streak, or very dominating period, and he gets beat by another great. Usually the first person to hand a really, really good fighter his first loss in "the heart of his prime". (not at the beginning or end.) is GREAT.

Or it can be simply just beating A fighter when he's near his best. For instance Harry greb beating Miske in his prime before Dempsey did. Jack Dillion dominating Batlling Levinsky when no one else could. In contrast how much credit, can you give to anyone, who beat say.. a fading fighter like Peter Maher, who hung on way to long, when eveyone was beating him!

Where they are in their careers is EVERYTHING, IN MY MIND. You cant become truly great beating up B-league guys. Killer instinct is worth alot!

[brownpimp88]

Wow...lol. Ignorant and disrespectful. Its a shame because you have knowledge of eras and fighters, but you seem to have no ability to judge fighters. Your knowledge is your strength and your ignorance, you think boxing is all about numbers and resumes; thats a shame.

Beleive it or not, beating tua and klitchko at heavyweight is better than beating archie and moore. Let me guess u think archie would actually beat vitali, right?

[brownpimp88]

Brownpimp, you've really gotta know how to judge great.

Me, I put a lot of merit, into where a fighters opponent is, in his given career. I have a huge amount of credit go to a fighter, if he beats another great fighter, in what i would call "the heart of his prime". Or when a fighter is on a long winning streak, or very dominating period, and he gets beat by another great. Usually the first person to hand a really, really good fighter his first loss in "the heart of his prime". (not at the beginning or end.) is GREAT.

Or it can be simply just beating A fighter when he's near his best. For instance Harry greb beating Miske in his prime before Dempsey did. Jack Dillion dominating Batlling Levinsky when no one else could. In contrast how much credit, can you give to anyone, who beat say.. a fading fighter like Peter Maher, who hung on way to long, when eveyone was beating him!

Where they are in their careers is EVERYTHING, IN MY MIND. You cant become truly great beating up B-league guys. Killer instinct is worth alot!

Ali wasnt looked at as the best heavyweight when he first retired. It took 10 years to finally give him the honour. Just wait another 10 years and you will see lennox getting the credit he deserves. He surpassed liston, he surpassed frazier, he surpassed dempsey, he surpassed jack johnson. It's not even a question, lennox was great, he is greatness.