Is Lennox Lewis the best Overall heavyweight in history?

[The plunger man]

The fact is even 38 year old Holmes was BETTER than Lewis was prior to his 21st fight,so you stop the B.s ANYONe can watch his fights and TRY and dispute that...go ahead watch his 18th/19th fight.......even Tubbs OUT of his prime took Bowe the distance in the 90's etc...etc....Tyson fought those guys at their best and had he fought lewis between 1990/1933 he would have torn him up.In his ACTUAL prime he crushes Lewis at least 4 out of 5 times.


I already gave you Brunos own words of him describing Tyson was harder to fight than Lewis...Tyson didnt even have skills developed at 15 in those sparring sessions yet knocked Lewis out of the ring....get your head together Plunger your getting knocked silly here!Even Holmes at 42 beat Mercer more convincinley than Lewis did...

Well thats bruno silly man....every fighter has a differnt style so what is bad for bruno doesnt mean its bad for another fighter lol....jesus your clueless son.....holyfield said that lewis was the only fighter to reall get to him lol...what does that prove. ....9 times out of 10 a good biggun will beat a good little one....duran had fits with hearns and was koed in 3 but went to war with hagler for 15 rounds....styles make fights and your the last person i thought would'nt know this.....tyson as soon as he came up against a fighter who could take his shots and punch back he lost....that was shown with dougals and holyfield

[The plunger man]

I didnt say anything about 1996...again Plunger stop being a fangirl.

Tyson looked good against medicocre heavyweights and even before he lost to douglas its safe to say he never faced anybody as good as lennox lewis and seeing as he lost to douglas proves my point...lewis was the better all round fighter and his record proves it...sorry juggers but your losing it

[BattlingNelson]

As what lewis said i beat the best bruno at my worst....

And? What would you expect him to say after being pushed to the limit by a huge washed up underdog?

obviously you have no idea when two rival heavyweights from the same country face eachother ...theres a lot more to fight for,

Its big alright. But bigger than fighting for the worlds heavyweight championship against the sports biggest star since Muhammad Ali?

plus it was mid october and cold as hell...i inow because i was there lol...check the blankets in between rounds..

Wtf? Whats the point? Was it only cold for LL?

Wtf man. Come on.

[The plunger man]

And? What would you expect him to say after being pushed to the limit by a huge washed up underdog?


Its big alright. But bigger than fighting for the worlds heavyweight championship against the sports biggest star since Muhammad Ali?


Wtf? Whats the point? Was it only cold for LL?

Wtf man. Come on.

Hold on a minute....im saying fighting in those conditions can effect your body and takes time to warm up....juggernaut was trying to compare performances agaisnt the same opponent when we both know styles make fights and i would expect you to understand that seeing as your a so called moderator and supposedly knowleqgble boxing guru lol.....im also saying that a fighter when facing a rival home fighter will fight that little bit more ala canelo vs chavez or barrera vs morales.....im not justifying that at all as different styles of boxers will create different results and bruno boxed out of his skin....but we can also say that with lewis vs ruddock or tyson vs ruddock.....tyson should have lost to james tillis who by the way had lost 4 or his last fights ..seems like you also have a very selective memory ..shall we assume tyson was pushed to his limit by a washed up hasbeen in tillis and actually lost that fight or shall we say that when he lost to evander holyfield seeing he also had heart problems and his fight before was koed by riddick bowe...the lennox lewis that beat andrew golota or the rematcn with rahman beats the the best tyson...be consistent FFS
for future reference
https://youtu.be/aVGyjvulVcs

[billeau2]

Im not comparing tua to tyson...im saying lewis when he was faced with a formidable puncher...he used his size , reach and weight to his advantage and neutralised them and he did that very well....yes it is about competition and who they faced and that's how you access a fighter with the fighters they beat....with spinks yes he beat holmes but he beat holmes one round at a time with his unorthodox movement and punching from all angles with the extra speed he had over an ageing Larry Holmes...tyson was all wrong for him because he had explosive power and speed and a lighter spinks would have no answer to that....tyson's record against medicocre heavyweight challengerss was astounding but when he steppped up he lost an he lost badly...you mention bruno.....now just like you i will disect the difference between the lewis contest and tyson....lewis faced bruno in the middle of october outside at cardiff arms park in wales...that night the outside temparature was very low and lewis needed a blanket in between rounds and he took some getting going...bruno was also a national hero and when theres a fight of this magnitude between two rival fighters then they fight out there skin....as what lewis said i beat the best bruno at my worst...tyson had brunos number .....very static and lacked stamina and they also boxed on tysons home soil
if were gonna go common opponents lets look at ruddock or tucker to see lewis dominated them far easier than tyson did....judging by who tyson beat and who avoided who which was tyson ....he was stripped for not fighting lewis....i cant see how you can even comtemplate tyson beatng lewis with the kind of fighters tyson was knocking over during his reign...take away spinks and holmes and really theres not much to his victorys...lewis should not have been stopped that first fight against mccall he was up at the count of 6 and he should have been given the chance to recover but the ref waived it off and then he was frozen out by don king for 3 years ....lewis IMO beats tyson ...too clever , too big....maybe tyson did study dempesy but that don't mean your gonna have the same ability or heart to match dempsey.....i studied leonard and tried to be like him when i was fighting but i could only dream......you think tyson beats lewis and i respect you and i think lewis wins......if tyson had made the olympics then there was a good chance they could have met but he got beat so we will never know

Look believe what you want dude...But dissecting is not making excuses like the weather, or the count, etc. There is a difference. We have a difference of opinion... If we consider these details for one fighter we have to for every fighter are we ready to do that? Do we know if Ali beat a healthy Liston? Do we know if James Toney as not rushed and had trained properly for Jones? did nasseme have a cocaine binge that did him in against Barrera? Its a slippery slope!

[StarshipTrooper]

You know, I like Lennox, but this thread is starting to give me a ****ing headache :frustrated9:

[billeau2]

Biggs and Ruddock defeated Lewis as amateurs as well. Tysons style didnt suit those Amatuer rules. I highly doubt Lewis would have taken the Tyson fight in those early 90's years,he was not remotley ready for such a pressure fighter go watch any one of his fights prior to his 20th fight he took a long time to develope and without Steward he would not have been as effective.

It would have looked completely different than the Tyson/Ruddock fight bc Tyson would have thrown punches non stop .Had Ruddock taken a break after the Tyson fights or not fought Tyson at all ,we dont know what the Lewis /Ruddock fight would look like or how competitive it would be,the Morrison vs Ruddock fight shows this bc he took 2 years off after the Lewis fight( you dont fight two brutal Tyson fights and be the same) anyone whos taken punches before will know why,ruddock was the ONLY guy to ever go punch for punch with Tyson in his entire career. Even Holyfield stated Ruddock would have been the champion if Tyson wasnt around at that time.

When Lewis fought Morrison he was well refined under steward moreso and thus had a better showing against Morrison than Ruddock did,he also went from the 220's to the 240's in weight,which suited him better style wise under Steward.Ruddock himself was pretty much done after 1991,in a long mostly wasted career of bad management,his last hurrah was with Morrison a fight he almost won in the first round but clearly a better fighter in THAT one bc he threw punches unlike the Lewis fight.

You and Plunger both present some very specific info about the state of the fighters regarding Lewis...But sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, we have to be very cirumspect about knowing the condition of opponents in some absolute way:

Im not saying that mentioning a fighter's age, or obvious decline isn't relevant...But it starts to get shakey for example if we want to say with certainty that Ruddock was beaten up past the point of no return by Tyson. or that Morrison was at some level...

It's not that you and Plunger are not correct about temperature gradients, long counts (plunger), or wearness and peak performance (RR & Morrison)...Its just that we would have to access virtually every such possibility with every fight and it would become impossible. Was Louis depressed? and didn't feel it for Schmelling? Was Foreman with food poison when he went against Ali?

Now, I will say that on a larger scale, for example, the development of Lewis versus versus Tyson because of training, is imo a true point. Its also true about amateur rules favoring certain fighters...and certainly not a puncher like Tyson.

Again its not that the specific points made by both you guys are without merit, its just that in my mind there are things that be proven and apply to everyone enough that they do not constitute a separate issue. We might never know HOW beat up Rudock was after Tyson...

[juggernaut666]

You and Plunger both present some very specific info about the state of the fighters regarding Lewis...But sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, we have to be very cirumspect about knowing the condition of opponents in some absolute way:

Im not saying that mentioning a fighter's age, or obvious decline isn't relevant...But it starts to get shakey for example if we want to say with certainty that Ruddock was beaten up past the point of no return by Tyson. or that Morrison was at some level...

It's not that you and Plunger are not correct about temperature gradients, long counts (plunger), or wearness and peak performance (RR & Morrison)...Its just that we would have to access virtually every such possibility with every fight and it would become impossible. Was Louis depressed? and didn't feel it for Schmelling? Was Foreman with food poison when he went against Ali?

Now, I will say that on a larger scale, for example, the development of Lewis versus versus Tyson because of training, is imo a true point. Its also true about amateur rules favoring certain fighters...and certainly not a puncher like Tyson.

Again its not that the specific points made by both you guys are without merit, its just that in my mind there are things that be proven and apply to everyone enough that they do not constitute a separate issue. We might never know HOW beat up Rudock was after Tyson...

Nothing he presented was good ,he used AMATUER fights ,Sparring matches , COLD weather , and years im not even comparing alongside SAME fighters who were NOT as good as when Lewis fought them, Plunger is an imbecile and it shows here just re re read his posts of what hes trying to manipulate ,he even stated Tyson should have lost to TILLIS ,hes a moron more than i originally thought !

[juggernaut666]

Tyson looked good against medicocre heavyweights and even before he lost to douglas its safe to say he never faced anybody as good as lennox lewis and seeing as he lost to douglas proves my point...lewis was the better all round fighter and his record proves it...sorry juggers but your losing it

The only thing PROVEN here is you have limited ability to understand TIME frames ,im not even getting into such nonsense ,you can bait and switch angles all you like . Your just TRYING to weasel out any which way now by bringing up Holyfield of the late 90's which wasnt disputed ,your simply a fanboy no need to go further here ,my last post to billeua summed you up perfectly .

[billeau2]

You know, I like Lennox, but this thread is starting to give me a ****ing headache :frustrated9:

One of those migraines where images all look like George's seurat pointillism paintings!