2002 Lennox Lewis vs 1988 Mike Tyson

[ross]

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.