Who had the better opponents?

Despite Wladimir's unsurpassed record, I like Lennox Lewis better. He had a solid defence too, but he had great finishing skills, something that eludes Wladimir today. Wladimir's impressive KO's in his dominant days have come from jabbing his opponent to the brink of collapse before brutally wasting them when they're defenceless. Lewis however had proven that he could jump on his opponents early at the smell of blood and bang them out with sizzling ferocity. Manny did his job a bit TOO good with Wladimir. Sometimes Wlad's fights are almost unwatchable where as Lennox has to be one of the most exciting HW's of all time (his combination of refined skills and brutal punching was a joy to observe). And Lewis had the personality where as Wladimir is only slightly more appealing than Ivan Drago!

But preferences aside, who had the better opponents really? I think, personally that Wladimir VS Lewis is pretty much a 50/50 proposition and that their opponents are virtually comparable.

This notion sounds absurd to the American and British fight fan, their running opinion for the most part being that Klitschko's opponents are a pile of shit!

Yet I have been in discussion with many East Euro fight fans and, NOT SURPRISINGLY, they claim almost the exact opposite.. That Lennox fought bums mainly. That Tyson, Holyfield, Botha, Grant, Golota, Rahman are all bums and represent his best wins and that most of Wladimir's opponents were better than what Lennox had.

Try put yourself in their shoes and look at it this way...

Haye destroys Grant, Thompson beats up the version of Tyson that Lewis fought, Chambers outboxes Tua every day of the week, Ibragimov has bashed Briggs and Holyfield, Peter pulverises Botha, Chagaev outboxes Golota and so on...

As you can see there is no clear cut solution, if your honest, and neither party can really rely on statistics to say with any degree of certainty that either Lennox or Wladimir had the better opponents.
It's a stalemate, I am forced to declare that they are atleast comparable.

Thompson wouldn't "beat up" Tyson if he fought him now let alone back then. Ibragimov "bashed" Holy/Briggs almost 10 years after Lewis beat them. I think it's pretty safe to say they were a little bit fresher 10 years before.

Eddie Chambers might beat Tua running for his life. Peter might get "lucky" against Botha but makes Botha look super slick skilled. Golota coming off smashing Riddick Bowes balls in would start a big favourite over Chagaev. Haye might have KO'd Grant but I wouldn't bank on it. Grant was an unbeaten, athletic giant when he fought Lewis.

In fact, you could have used a bunch of other Lewis victims to face this lot - Ruddock, Mercer, Morrison, Bruno, Rahman, McCall. Fuck... you can even throw Akinwande and Gary Mason in there.

So lets be honest - if your friends are claiming Lewis beat a load of "bums" compared to Wlad, they are complete and utter idiots. Fact.

Bilbo??? That you buddy :peeker:

Yes, yes of course the match ups can either be disputed or rearranged to show Lewis' superiority, that's given. Fact is in Europe this sort of mindset is mainstream.

I think that their opponents are quite comparable personally although I would not go so far as to say Wlad had better. Not by a long shot.

Wlads opponents have been awful in comparison, your own wonderful Michael Grant who you rate so highly, was blasted by Lewis. Wlad can only beat what is in front of him which he does and do that consistently over a period of time which he does but he does not always do it in a convincing manner against fighters he should.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Bilbo??? That you buddy :peeker:

---

For the first time , I now seem clear , just ban this clown it is all just a piss take.
Bilbo you are not welcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Wlads opponents have been awful in comparison, your own wonderful Michael Grant who you rate so highly, was blasted by Lewis. Wlad can only beat what is in front of him which he does and do that consistently over a period of time which he does but he does not always do it in a convincing manner against fighters he should.

---

Convinving manner? He rarely looses a round. Don't ya mean in a devastating or exciting manner?

Lewis was the peoples champ for a reason

Hey @Max Power ... You have 1 opinion and when people have out argued you to the point where they stop reading and posting to your thread you just start a new one with the same old garbage huh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Yes, yes of course the match ups can either be disputed or rearranged to show Lewis' superiority, that's given. Fact is in Europe this sort of mindset is mainstream.

I think that their opponents are quite comparable personally although I would not go so far as to say Wlad had better. Not by a long shot.

---

Well, as you started the thread, you might as well have a go at explaining why Wlad's opposition is comparable?

Quote:

---

For the first time , I now seem clear , just ban this clown it is all just a piss take.
Bilbo you are not welcome.

---

I dunno who your Middle Earth friend is but I assure you I'm an original. If this Bilbo character was an antagonist of yours though then I can already judge he must have been a helluva bloke! ;)

Well Fenster, let's take a look...

Lennox Lewis opponents

Vitali Klitschko
Mike Tyson
Hasim Rahman
David Tua
Francois Botha
Michael Grant
Evander Holyfield
Zelijko Mavrovic
Shannon Briggs
Andrew Golota
Henry Akinwande
Oliver McCall
Ray Mercer
Tommy Morrison
Frank Bruno
Tony Tucker
Donovan Ruddock


Wladimir Klitschko opponents

Alexander Povetkin
David Haye
Samuel Peter
Tony Thompson
Hasim Rahman
Ray Mercer
Chris Byrd
Eddie Chambers
Ruslan Chagaev
Sultan Ibragimov
Lamon Brewster
Jameel McCline
Francois Botha
Ray Austin
Calvin Brock
Francesco Pianeta
Mariusz Wach

I just listed 17 opponents each of both fighters. The thing is you can play mix and match with these guys all day and find plausible results for both guys. The only REAL difference apparent in quality for an American seems to me to be that the names on Lennox's list are recognisable and the ones on Wladimir's are more obscure (or possibly dismissed due to their ethnicity). Take for example Ibragimov. At the time, this guy was touted as "hot shit" and "reviving the HW division" and was quite rightly promoted. However because of his premature exit from boxing has been viewed subsequently in a so so light. In all honestly this guy would have been a tough opponent for Lewis.

If you take a look at some of the true greats that Lewis beat though, all may not be as it seems.. The best opponent by far is Vitali Klitschko. There is no analogue for this fighter on Wladimir's record. He never fought another fighter as good as himself like Lewis did so that's a big tick in Lennox column but the result of that fight leaves a bitter taste in mouths to this very day. The fight is inconclusive as to who was the better boxer.

Mike Tyson was shot, there is some considerable doubt as to whether Lewis could have handled the prime Tyson.

Evander Holyfield fights were fairly close (one of them anyway) and Holy was apparently not his best casting atleast a little doubt.

And then there were some lacklustre performances against guys he should have beaten.

Ray Mercer he was lucky to pull off the victory. Probably the only good opponent Mercer managed to actually "box" well.

He struggled against Bruno, a fighter a dominant champ should be able to KO easily

He had some problems with the drug wasted version of Tucker.

He even had a tough time against a grocery store owner from Croatia in Zelijko Mavrovic who weighed less than 220lbs!

As for losses, 2/44 and 3/64 are about even in %. McCall and Rahman are about the equivalent of Brewster and Sanders.

As for common opponents, Wladimir performed better against 3 of 4 of them (but the age difference probably nullifies this, Ray Mercer had been massively KO'd by that stage for example)

And finally the figures are there to be checked but I found that of the 17 topper opponents listed for each guy, Klitschko's were mathematically better slightly over all..

-He faced southpaws where as Lewis either ducked/never fought them. Southpaws are more difficult opponents to KO or perform well against for orthodox boxers
-He faced (and KO'd) more previously unKO-able opponents
-His opponents were heftier and taller on average
-He faced (and defeated) more unbeaten opponents than Lennox and opponents with slightly better records on average

Additionally some of Wladimir's opponents have wasted some of Lennox's (McCline/Grant etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Additionally some of Lewis's opponents have wasted some of Lennox's (McCline/Grant etc)

---

you're a brilliant guy!

Corrected. Thanks wife! Now hit the kitchen you ball breaker!

@Max Power

Basically all you've done is put a negative spin on Lewis record, which can easily be done to Wlad and any other fighter in history. So here goes...

If you are going to claim some of Lewis's opponents were "shot" or past their best then the same applies to Wlad. So take Rahman, Mercer and Botha off Wlad's list. Lewis had already dispatched much fresher versions that had been competing in world-class long before Wlad faced them.

To say Lewis "struggled" with some opponents probably indicates they were good fighters. Or maybe it's the old cliche - styles make fights. Or maybe he had an "off" night. Either way, Wlad "struggled" with Sam Peter, jumping on the floor 3 times, he struggled with Sanders, Purity and Brewster by getting knocked out. Are these men any better than those that Lewis "struggled" with? Sanders had previously been knocked out by a Lewis victim - Rahman. Brewster had been beaten by Clifford Etienne, a man the "shot" Mike Tyson knocked out in 1 round after he had become a Lewis victim. Purity was a journeyman. Wlad's big brother beat the shit out of Peter, who subsequently lost again before Wlad stopped him in the rematch, but then subsequently got knocked out again.

Mariusz Wach, Francesco Pianeta, Calvin Brock, Ray Austin and Tony Thompson? What do these guys have in common? None of them even fought for a "world" title let alone won anything before or after facing Wlad. It's not just a case of these guys being more obscure, they have never proven themselves in world-class.

Wlad's three biggest fights (arguably) - Haye, Povetkin and Ibragimov. What do these have in common? They were all boring stinkers.

So to sum up -

1. Lewis beat every man that he ever fought. Something Wlad can't claim.

2. Lewis's list of opponents is a virtual who's who of former and even current "world" champions and challengers. Many of Wlad's best opponents have clearly never proven themselves at the highest level and subsequently achieved nothing since facing him.

3. Lewis has a whole bunch of spectacular, memorable performances or dominant KO's inside 8 rounds - Ruddock, Grant, Morrison, Botha, Briggs, Golota, Rahman, Tyson, Bruno, Vitali etc. The only "thrilling" fights Wlad has ever been involved in have resulted in him getting knocked out.

Lewis is by far the superior champion on every level. Fact.

Makes me smile when people say Lewis struggled with the likes of Mercer etc.
Well Clay struggled with Norton , so it's clear styles make fights.
Lewis was a top fighter and far easier on the eye then Wlad, is Wlad a top fighter. ? Yes he is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Makes me smile when people say Lewis struggled with the likes of Mercer etc.
Well Clay struggled with Norton , so it's clear styles make fights.
Lewis was a top fighter and far easier on the eye then Wlad, is Wlad a top fighter. ? Yes he is.

---

It makes me smile when people actually think the Mercer who fought Lewis or Holyfield is comparable to the ghost who fought Wlad. And he boxed both of them pretty damn well off the jab. The same jab that found Wlad a bit!

Quote:

---

@Max Power

Basically all you've done is put a negative spin on Lewis record, which can easily be done to Wlad and any other fighter in history. So here goes...

If you are going to claim some of Lewis's opponents were "shot" or past their best then the same applies to Wlad. So take Rahman, Mercer and Botha off Wlad's list. Lewis had already dispatched much fresher versions that had been competing in world-class long before Wlad faced them.

To say Lewis "struggled" with some opponents probably indicates they were good fighters. Or maybe it's the old cliche - styles make fights. Or maybe he had an "off" night. Either way, Wlad "struggled" with Sam Peter, jumping on the floor 3 times, he struggled with Sanders, Purity and Brewster by getting knocked out. Are these men any better than those that Lewis "struggled" with? Sanders had previously been knocked out by a Lewis victim - Rahman. Brewster had been beaten by Clifford Etienne, a man the "shot" Mike Tyson knocked out in 1 round after he had become a Lewis victim. Purity was a journeyman. Wlad's big brother beat the shit out of Peter, who subsequently lost again before Wlad stopped him in the rematch, but then subsequently got knocked out again.

Mariusz Wach, Francesco Pianeta, Calvin Brock, Ray Austin and Tony Thompson? What do these guys have in common? None of them even fought for a "world" title let alone won anything before or after facing Wlad. It's not just a case of these guys being more obscure, they have never proven themselves in world-class.

Wlad's three biggest fights (arguably) - Haye, Povetkin and Ibragimov. What do these have in common? They were all boring stinkers.

So to sum up -

1. Lewis beat every man that he ever fought. Something Wlad can't claim.

2. Lewis's list of opponents is a virtual who's who of former and even current "world" champions and challengers. Many of Wlad's best opponents have clearly never proven themselves at the highest level and subsequently achieved nothing since facing him.

3. Lewis has a whole bunch of spectacular, memorable performances or dominant KO's inside 8 rounds - Ruddock, Grant, Morrison, Botha, Briggs, Golota, Rahman, Tyson, Bruno, Vitali etc. The only "thrilling" fights Wlad has ever been involved in have resulted in him getting knocked out.

Lewis is by far the superior champion on every level. Fact.

---

Ok I'm somewhat convinced here. Most of your points I have nothing to counter offer. These are the reasons I rank Lenny #1 myself. All I will maintain is that I don't believe the gap between Lewis's opponents and Wlad's is that far and SOME of Wlad's might be better than what Lennox had.

But over all... You're right, Lennox did face the better opponents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

@Max Power

Basically all you've done is put a negative spin on Lewis record, which can easily be done to Wlad and any other fighter in history. So here goes...

If you are going to claim some of Lewis's opponents were "shot" or past their best then the same applies to Wlad. So take Rahman, Mercer and Botha off Wlad's list. Lewis had already dispatched much fresher versions that had been competing in world-class long before Wlad faced them.

To say Lewis "struggled" with some opponents probably indicates they were good fighters. Or maybe it's the old cliche - styles make fights. Or maybe he had an "off" night. Either way, Wlad "struggled" with Sam Peter, jumping on the floor 3 times, he struggled with Sanders, Purity and Brewster by getting knocked out. Are these men any better than those that Lewis "struggled" with? Sanders had previously been knocked out by a Lewis victim - Rahman. Brewster had been beaten by Clifford Etienne, a man the "shot" Mike Tyson knocked out in 1 round after he had become a Lewis victim. Purity was a journeyman. Wlad's big brother beat the shit out of Peter, who subsequently lost again before Wlad stopped him in the rematch, but then subsequently got knocked out again.

Mariusz Wach, Francesco Pianeta, Calvin Brock, Ray Austin and Tony Thompson? What do these guys have in common? None of them even fought for a "world" title let alone won anything before or after facing Wlad. It's not just a case of these guys being more obscure, they have never proven themselves in world-class.

Wlad's three biggest fights (arguably) - Haye, Povetkin and Ibragimov. What do these have in common? They were all boring stinkers.

So to sum up -

1. Lewis beat every man that he ever fought. Something Wlad can't claim.

2. Lewis's list of opponents is a virtual who's who of former and even current "world" champions and challengers. Many of Wlad's best opponents have clearly never proven themselves at the highest level and subsequently achieved nothing since facing him.

3. Lewis has a whole bunch of spectacular, memorable performances or dominant KO's inside 8 rounds - Ruddock, Grant, Morrison, Botha, Briggs, Golota, Rahman, Tyson, Bruno, Vitali etc. The only "thrilling" fights Wlad has ever been involved in have resulted in him getting knocked out.

Lewis is by far the superior champion on every level. Fact.

---

Ok I'm somewhat convinced here. Most of your points I have nothing to counter offer. These are the reasons I rank Lenny #1 myself. All I will maintain is that I don't believe the gap between Lewis's opponents and Wlad's is that far and SOME of Wlad's might be better than what Lennox had.

But over all... You're right, Lennox did face the better opponents.

---

Thanks for the debate.

One final point, when I was looking over Wlad's opposition I couldn't think of any memorable, notable or modern day classics they had been in, other than his few opponents that were already Lewis victims.

But when you look at Lewis's opponents it almost instantly throws up - Tyson-Holyfield x 2. Holyfield-Bowe x 3. Golota-Bowe x 2. Rahman-Sanders. Mercer-Morrison. Ruddock-Tyson x 2. Morrison-Ruddock. Tua-Ibeabuchi. Tua-Ruiz. Bruno-McCall. Significant fights like Briggs-Foreman and even fights like Botha-Moorer that tie in with Moorer-Foreman/Holyfield etc.

It's not a western bias. Quite simply Lewis beat men that were in great/memorable/notable fights. Unfortunately Wlad and his best opponents haven't done the same. :)

That can't be completely true. Sander's vs Vitali was a good smash up. Brewster vs Liakovich was undeniably good. Ibragimov vs Whitaker was ok. Samuel PEter had some decent fights. Haye is beautiful to watch most of the time.

On the contrary I think it's mainly against Wladimir that they are forced into the kind of fight that is not fan friendly. I think Wlad would do that to just about any of the shorter opponents that Lennox faced too, even Holyfield probably.

When Wlad fights taller guys like Wach and Thompson he seems to bust out the right hand more often than just the jab. He does not like the shorter guys that try to bull inside. He knows that is the only place they can be effective and knows if he neutralises it, the fight is won (and incidentally doesn't put his famous chin at risk as well).

Personally I do agree with you Fenster, that LEnnox and his opponents did have more watchable fights than Wladimir AND his opponents. There has definitely been a decline there I can see that too. I would say though that one of the big reasons for me though is that it is hard to find HBO or otherwise coverage in English now of the major HW fights.

I don't find Wlad's fights that entertaining compared with Vitali, Lennox, Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, he is not fan friendly, I'll give you that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

If you take a look at some of the true greats that Lewis beat though, all may not be as it seems.. The best opponent by far is Vitali Klitschko.

---

I agree ! vitali was the best win for lewis and we know that david haye would beat vitali because errrrr david haye said so and he wore a t-shirt :S Wladimir beat haye and haye scared vitali into semi retirement so Wladimir has the better record.. It must be true !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

That can't be completely true. Sander's vs Vitali was a good smash up. Brewster vs Liakovich was undeniably good. Ibragimov vs Whitaker was ok. Samuel PEter had some decent fights. Haye is beautiful to watch most of the time.

On the contrary I think it's mainly against Wladimir that they are forced into the kind of fight that is not fan friendly. I think Wlad would do that to just about any of the shorter opponents that Lennox faced too, even Holyfield probably.

When Wlad fights taller guys like Wach and Thompson he seems to bust out the right hand more often than just the jab. He does not like the shorter guys that try to bull inside. He knows that is the only place they can be effective and knows if he neutralises it, the fight is won (and incidentally doesn't put his famous chin at risk as well).

Personally I do agree with you Fenster, that LEnnox and his opponents did have more watchable fights than Wladimir AND his opponents. There has definitely been a decline there I can see that too. I would say though that one of the big reasons for me though is that it is hard to find HBO or otherwise coverage in English now of the major HW fights.

I don't find Wlad's fights that entertaining compared with Vitali, Lennox, Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, he is not fan friendly, I'll give you that.

---

Apart from Chisora, all of Hayes heavyweight fights have been shite

5 fights in 5 years. Unfortunately, Haye has ultimately proven to be a disappointment at Heavyweight in the ring.
2009 - Nikolay Valuev
2010 - John Ruiz, Audley Harrison.
2011 - Wladimir Klitschko
2012 - Dereck Chisora
2013 - --------

Coming out of the gate at Heavyweight in late 2008, it looked like he'd infuse some real action and public interest in an otherwise uninteresting Heavyweight scene. Alas, that hasn't turned out to be the case.

Haye ain't the only inactive top guy though, mayweather too and several others, you'd think top pro fighters would try to make the most of their athletic primes and cash in as much as they can while they're physically able to. Most guys only get about 5 years where they put it all together...

That is unfortunate Bradlee I do agree.

It is NOT a reflection on the quality of them as boxers.

But it is a reflection that they are there for the title only (Floyd has them, Haye is only interested in fighting when it's for one of them) and they are there for the money (both are wealthy and so don't care to risk or put forth effort for anything less than a belt like Haye, or to prove undeniably they are the greatest like Floyd ducking Pac.

It sucks. They're scum for it and THIS is a MAJOR problem in modern professional boxing! I agree with that.

Haye DID let us all down. Fact!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

That is unfortunate Bradlee I do agree.

It is NOT a reflection on the quality of them as boxers.

---

What's unfortunate is that your posts are a reflection of either your particular level of mental retardation or your trolling abilities. It's one or the other. Sometimes when I read your nonsense, I say to myself, "Self, this guy's obviously just trolling 'cause nobody could really be that dumb!" But then again, I KNOW from personal experience that there really are many, many people on this planet that really are that dumb! I'm leaning more towards you being a troll, though not a particularly good one. You're certainly no Donny!