2002 Lennox Lewis vs 1988 Mike Tyson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

I agree, but there's one missing factor...... mentality.

Tyson at his peak was unwavering. He fought some huge punchers (ie: Razor Ruddock), and still found the way and the will to win. With Lennox, you didn't know what you were going to get on fight night. Laser-focused and angry..... or lazy and lackadaisical. If you add the adjectives on 2002 Lewis, namely focused and determined..... THEN I would agree with Lewis winning 7 or 8 times out of 10. Otherwise forget it.

---

Alright then, let's account for that then

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKjK95aRrhc


All of that was bubbling under the surface, just 1 or 2 good shots away

Yeah, we all know Tyson was a head case.
Still, he never went into the ring unfocused or lackadaisical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sleepwalker

Experienced, physically gifted, and slightly past his prime Lewis vs Peak, blazing fast, head-moving, Kevin Rooney advising Tyson.

Lewis still wins. The fact that Tyson had some serious struggles against above average taller fighters says a lot. Imagine was Lewis would do, regardless of Mike's speed. Lennox was too big and knew how to take advantage of his physical gifts. It'd be a nightmare for Tyson to close the gap and get near enough to Lennox to land something big. As McCall and Rahman proved, Lennox can be knocked out when he's off balance or caught off guard, but he knew how to protect himself well. There's always a chance that Tyson could slip something past Lennox and hurt him. But when Lennox is focused, he ain't going anywhere. Key word is FOCUSED.

After the 6th or 7th round and once Tyson's head-movement quickly fades, Lewis wins almost all of the remaining rounds to a UD.

---

2002 Lennox ? What you been smoking son ? You're talking like the 2002 Lennox was vintage. Not forgetting a year earlier in 01 he was knocked out Rahman. The 2002 Lennox was 37. I think you should have said the 92 Lennox that beat Ruddock.

Either way. 02 Lennox or 92 Lennox, 88 Tyson beats the both of them........and beats Lennox fairly easily. The 02 Tyson was a wreck hooked on coke, not training and even then, Lewis still took 8 rounds to get him out of there.

However I would say that Holyfield may well have beaten a prime Tyson, due to his style. But not Lewis.

End of the day - Tyson - Lewis was like Jones - Calazghe or Hopkins - Calzaghe or Pac-Man - Mayweather......made ten years too late.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeeod

Fascinating match up, in my opinion. Right off the bat we all have to admit that if Rahman and McCall could stop Zlennox with one shot, Tyson could also. So... Tyson will always have that punchers chance in this match up.

Looking at the fighters and their mentality objectively, however, we all have to admit that Tyson always struggled vs large, physical fighters and those who jabbed well. I also feel that Lennox was vulnerable when he overlooked his opponent as evidenced by his fights vs. McCall, Rahman, Bruno, and Mercer, to name a few. Lennox would not take Tyson lightly, and I feel like Lennox was most dominant in fights vs those he viewed as dangerous, such as Tua, Grant, Ruddock, and Golota.

Lennox's size, boxing ability, jab, and smothering tactics would alwZys trouble Tyson. Mike was extremely fast and aggressive in his prime, so a knockout of Lewis is always a realistic possibility. I think the more likely outcome, however, is that Lennox breaks Mike down with the jab, leaning on Tyson and smothering him inside, before landing the big shots late for the stoppage. Just my take though...

---

You basing that on the actual fight which sounds ridiculous. Would you say Holmes stops or even beats a young Ali?

Would you say Marciano stops or beats a young Louis?

Fighters need the reflexes and skills that made them succesfull in the first place and Mikes had long gone at the point they fought.

When you say struggled you mean had to go to points because those fights he struggled in he still completely dominated unlike Lewis who should have lost against Mercer. Lews struggled with fighters who put it on him. Mavrovich had Lewis on the ropes in parts of their fight.

Lewis never had a prolonged period of dominance because of thise knockout losses. There was never a point in his career where people thought he was unbeatable unlike Mike Tyson.

---

I would argue that Lennox was dominant for a longer time than Tyson. Lewis lost to McCall in the mid-90s and Rahman in 2000/01 time frame, and avenged both losses. The truth is that Tyson never fought a complete, large heavyweight who wasn't terrified of him until Buster Douglas. Douglas, Lennox, and Evander all used the jab to control and punish Tyson. Mike was well past his best vs Lennox, but was considered the baddest man on the planet when he faced the other two. Additionally, while he did win those fights vs Tucker, Ruddock, and Smith, he did struggle with their sheer size, and none were ANYWHERE near the complete/elite fighter that 2002 Lennox was.

For your other questions, I think Holmes gives Ali fits prime vs prime, and Louis beats Marciano, but takes some serious punishment in the process.

Tyson did not struggle with big fighters he beat them relatively easy it is just that you could count on one hand the moments of success they had ie Tucker right uppercut 2nd round, Bonecrusher right hand in 12th round ect

That was how good Tyson was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Tyson did not struggle with big fighters he beat them relatively easy it is just that you could count on one hand the moments of success they had ie Tucker right uppercut 2nd round, Bonecrusher right hand in 12th round ect

That was how good Tyson was.

---

You are right to point out pre 1990 that he did not struggle to beat the bigger physical fighters. But he clearly had periods of frustration against Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith and Tucker, as all five used their size to neutralize his awesome offence, but at a cost of very limited offence in return.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Tyson did not struggle with big fighters he beat them relatively easy it is just that you could count on one hand the moments of success they had ie Tucker right uppercut 2nd round, Bonecrusher right hand in 12th round ect

That was how good Tyson was.

---

You are right to point out pre 1990 that he did not struggle to beat the bigger physical fighters. But he clearly had periods of frustration against Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith and Tucker, as all five used their size to neutralize his awesome offence, but at a cost of very limited offence in return.

---

Which is where I think Lennox would fight too defensively and lose the fight albeit by decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Tyson did not struggle with big fighters he beat them relatively easy it is just that you could count on one hand the moments of success they had ie Tucker right uppercut 2nd round, Bonecrusher right hand in 12th round ect

That was how good Tyson was.

---

You are right to point out pre 1990 that he did not struggle to beat the bigger physical fighters. But he clearly had periods of frustration against Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith and Tucker, as all five used their size to neutralize his awesome offence, but at a cost of very limited offence in return.

---

Which is where I think Lennox would fight too defensively and lose the fight albeit by decision.

---

Lewis was as defensively sound as any of them fighters, but his offence blows them all out the water and only Smith can claim parity in the power stakes.

Tyson never won a fight that was in the balance after six rounds, Lewis always ;) found a way to beat his opponent in the end, from that position.

The only hope for Tyson is that Lewis' alter ego Lummox shows up, and then Mike can win a shootout inside four rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeeod

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeeod

Fascinating match up, in my opinion. Right off the bat we all have to admit that if Rahman and McCall could stop Zlennox with one shot, Tyson could also. So... Tyson will always have that punchers chance in this match up.

Looking at the fighters and their mentality objectively, however, we all have to admit that Tyson always struggled vs large, physical fighters and those who jabbed well. I also feel that Lennox was vulnerable when he overlooked his opponent as evidenced by his fights vs. McCall, Rahman, Bruno, and Mercer, to name a few. Lennox would not take Tyson lightly, and I feel like Lennox was most dominant in fights vs those he viewed as dangerous, such as Tua, Grant, Ruddock, and Golota.

Lennox's size, boxing ability, jab, and smothering tactics would alwZys trouble Tyson. Mike was extremely fast and aggressive in his prime, so a knockout of Lewis is always a realistic possibility. I think the more likely outcome, however, is that Lennox breaks Mike down with the jab, leaning on Tyson and smothering him inside, before landing the big shots late for the stoppage. Just my take though...

---

You basing that on the actual fight which sounds ridiculous. Would you say Holmes stops or even beats a young Ali?

Would you say Marciano stops or beats a young Louis?

Fighters need the reflexes and skills that made them succesfull in the first place and Mikes had long gone at the point they fought.

When you say struggled you mean had to go to points because those fights he struggled in he still completely dominated unlike Lewis who should have lost against Mercer. Lews struggled with fighters who put it on him. Mavrovich had Lewis on the ropes in parts of their fight.

Lewis never had a prolonged period of dominance because of thise knockout losses. There was never a point in his career where people thought he was unbeatable unlike Mike Tyson.

---

I would argue that Lennox was dominant for a longer time than Tyson. Lewis lost to McCall in the mid-90s and Rahman in 2000/01 time frame, and avenged both losses. The truth is that Tyson never fought a complete, large heavyweight who wasn't terrified of him until Buster Douglas. Douglas, Lennox, and Evander all used the jab to control and punish Tyson. Mike was well past his best vs Lennox, but was considered the baddest man on the planet when he faced the other two. Additionally, while he did win those fights vs Tucker, Ruddock, and Smith, he did struggle with their sheer size, and none were ANYWHERE near the complete/elite fighter that 2002 Lennox was.

For your other questions, I think Holmes gives Ali fits prime vs prime, and Louis beats Marciano, but takes some serious punishment in the process.

---

Argue all you like the facts are Tyson wiped out the top ten and left no one with any perceived chance of beating him. He lost to the biggest ever shock in boxing because he just didnt train properly and let himself down.

How long was Lewis the universally recognised best in the world in one period?

Mike made 6 successfull defences of all 3 belts (losing them in the 7th defence, no other fighter in any other division has held all the titles and defended the, as many times) after unifying 3 separate belts by beating 3 defending champions. Lewis won vacated titles and when he did have them all could only manage a couple of defences of them. He rather chose to drop some so he didnt have to face certain fighters, unlike Mike who proved there was no one in his brief era who could touch him until he big time let himself down in boxing historys biggest shock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Tyson did not struggle with big fighters he beat them relatively easy it is just that you could count on one hand the moments of success they had ie Tucker right uppercut 2nd round, Bonecrusher right hand in 12th round ect

That was how good Tyson was.

---

You are right to point out pre 1990 that he did not struggle to beat the bigger physical fighters. But he clearly had periods of frustration against Tillis, Green, Ribalta, Smith and Tucker, as all five used their size to neutralize his awesome offence, but at a cost of very limited offence in return.

---

Which is where I think Lennox would fight too defensively and lose the fight albeit by decision.

---

Lewis was as defensively sound as any of them fighters, but his offence blows them all out the water and only Smith can claim parity in the power stakes.

Tyson never won a fight that was in the balance after six rounds, Lewis always ;) found a way to beat his opponent in the end, from that position.

The only hope for Tyson is that Lewis' alter ego Lummox shows up, and then Mike can win a shootout inside four rounds.

---

No doubt Lewis was better than Tyson's opponents he beat during that period but not good enough to beat Tyson.

Reading through the thread i've decided Lewis would have beat prime Mike. Too strong, too intelligent. However, prime Mike would start favourite over any heavyweight in history.

1988 Tyson is the best HW of all time. Its like men vs machine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Reading through the thread i've decided Lewis would have beat prime Mike. Too strong, too intelligent. However, prime Mike would start favourite over any heavyweight in history.

---

I think you have summed it up.

Tyson brought so many people into the sport, there is an emotional attachment that warps opinion on him. I always say he is the most underrated overrated fighter boxing has seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Reading through the thread i've decided Lewis would have beat prime Mike. Too strong, too intelligent. However, prime Mike would start favourite over any heavyweight in history.

---

I think you have summed it up.

Tyson brought so many people into the sport, there is an emotional attachment that warps opinion on him. I always say he is boxing's most underrated overrated fighter boxing has seen.

---

Ok, so let me get this right? Are you 2 saying Lewis beats every single HW in history?
Or are we just having a play with words here and saying something but not saying anything?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Britkid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Reading through the thread i've decided Lewis would have beat prime Mike. Too strong, too intelligent. However, prime Mike would start favourite over any heavyweight in history.

---

I think you have summed it up.

Tyson brought so many people into the sport, there is an emotional attachment that warps opinion on him. I always say he is boxing's most underrated overrated fighter boxing has seen.

---

Name another fighter in any division that has defended the unified WBC, WBA and IBF titles sucessfully 6 times in one run.

That fighter is not an over rated fighter. That fighter has had to fight everyone.