Was Lennox Lewis the greatest HW of ALL-TIME?

[No Contest]

I think Ali takes it , Lewis is another boring Steward fighter who got by on his size and power. If Ali could take apart a prime Foreman, I don't doubth he could figure out the 1 2 Lewis style. Either Lewis bores the crap out of everyone and just 1 2 at range or Ali lights him up. But its definately not goin to Lewis 9 of 10 fights.

[THE THIRD MAN]

The Third man between having kts dick in your mouth and your just blind hate of Lewis its just funny. I mean we can name a lot of fighters that trouble Ali that should not have in his prime. Liston best win is Patterson thats it fucking blown up light heavyweight. Tyson lost ever big fight he was ever in what makes Lewis any different. The fight with Holyfield was close but first fight the real deal got own and i am Holyfeild fan a huge Holyfeild but he lost that fight strait up i can say that much. Now i would not have Lewis in the greatest of all time but if you don't have Lewis in the top 10 heavy then you don't know shit. Also Bowie wanted nothing to do with Lewis don't know why his name even coming up in this thread, with Lewis resume and beating every man put in front of him he deserves alot more then what people are giving him.

Not from me he isn't. I have no hate toward Lewis at all, i just believe him to be over rated and not a top 10 all time great heavyweight Champion. Reading your reply does remind me a lot of how Lewis must have felt after being hit by Hasim Rahman!

[erics44]

9 times out of 10 Lennox Lewis would have beaten Ali

it might be hard to swallow because of the fairy tales of Ali but its true

id put lewis in the top 2 or 3 HWs of all time

I don't know about 9 out of 10 times - I can picture them being pretty even like the Frazier fights (obviously in a different way because of the differing styles).

I know it's a cop-out answer but I'd still put Ali as the greatest just for everything he achieved in and out of the boxing ring. It's very rare that you get a superstar who is the absolute best at his sport, fights everybody put in front of him, has a chin, has the skills and has the charisma/worldwide appeal that Ali had. You just can't touch that.

In terms of pure boxing, Ali in his prime gives every heavyweight in history a run for their money imho..But styles make fights.

As far as Lewis, he was very under-appreciated while boxing. Another case of "missed when he was gone. I'd put him within the top 5 heavy's of all time.

if someone asked me who was the greatest hw of all time I could answer Ali because of his charisma and what he achieved outside the ring

hes not the greatest hw boxer of all time, he would have lost to a number of others most of the time

same can be said about Lewis, a small Oliver McCall was able to spark him in a round, so what tells you that Joe Frazier wouldn't be able to follow suit?

yep that did happen but i dont think you can sum up Lewis' career on that performance

999 times out of 1000 lewis would beat McCall

about the same ratio with frazier

I would go as far to say that Frazier is the most over rated HW of all time

[Matias64]

I think sportmen of 2010's are generally better trained, more healthy, stronger, bigger, faster, have better technic, etc than those of 1960's, 1970's, 1980's. Besides in internet world teams behind boxers have much more knowledge about weakness and strongness of boxers. Knowledge of boxing is now better than ever before - even in times of Lenox Lewis. That's why there many things support this list of all time best heavyweight champions:

1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Wladimir Klitschko
3. Lenox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Muhammad Ali
6. Larry Holmes
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Sonny Liston
10. Rocky Marciano or Joe Louis

You can think about it by comparing athletics like Carl Lewis vs. Usain Bolt, Jim Hines vs. Carl Lewis or Bekele vs. Lasse Viren (Emil Zatopek vs. Paavo Nurmi). The problem is that we tend to appreciate too much these old time heroes with no critic at all.

On the other hand i have to say that Joe Louis in his time and Muhammad Ali in his time were surely showing much more skill and technic than any of their rivals at the same time of before. It's not their fault if knowledge of boxing, know how, is now much more better. It's just unfair to compare Muhammad Ali to Vitali Klitschko just as computer of 1950's to supercomputer of our time.

[erics44]

I think sportmen of 2010's are generally better trained, more healthy, stronger, bigger, faster, have better technic, etc than those of 1960's, 1970's, 1980's. Besides in internet world teams behind boxers have much more knowledge about weakness and strongness of boxers. Knowledge of boxing is now better than ever before - even in times of Lenox Lewis. That's why there many things support this list of all time best heavyweight champions:

1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Wladimir Klitschko
3. Lenox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Muhammad Ali
6. Larry Holmes
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Sonny Liston
10. Rocky Marciano or Joe Louis

You can think about it by comparing athletics like Carl Lewis vs. Usain Bolt, Jim Hines vs. Carl Lewis or Bekele vs. Lasse Viren (Emil Zatopek vs. Paavo Nurmi). The problem is that we tend to appreciate too much these old time heroes with no critic at all.

On the other hand i have to say that Joe Louis in his time and Muhammad Ali in his time were surely showing much more skill and technic than any of their rivals at the same time of before. It's not their fault if knowledge of boxing, know how, is now much more better. It's just unfair to compare Muhammad Ali to Vitali Klitschko just as computer of 1950's to supercomputer of our time.

good post mate, hits the nail on the head

[rjj tszyu]

yes he certainly completed dominated Tua, boring as all hell as it was; but he couldnt really seriously hurt or let alone finish him. Tua fought un-gallantly and hardly took risks to press Lewis. My point is if a pressure fighter like Frazier or Tyson really pressed Lewis, good chins that they had of iron practically, and willing to take a few to give a few, how well would Lewis have dealt with 1988 Tyson? I dont know, Im just wondering what others think.

As for 1965 Clay being guff, well, listen, that dude WAS magic in that year, as in '66, '67 as well.

Bob Hayes was olimpic 100 m champion in 1964 , you think he would hold up against Usain Bolt ?
Clay was a top fighter but its ridiculous to think he would have beaten all of todays massive HW'S , the guy was out fought by glass jawed Ken Norton.
No way in hell he beats Lewis best of 3 , sorry i just dont buy the living in the past bullshit, yes some old time fighters who have to make weight could beat todays fighters of the same weight , but im sorry clay was a pup compared to Hw's like Lewis.

What a load of shit. A very old George Foreman who Ali KO'd in his absolute peak came back and won THE HW title in Lennox Lewis' era. Evander Holyfield was smaller than Ali and past his prime and still gave Lewis serious problems in the second fight. Ali would be champ in any era without doubt.

[BIG H]

I think sportmen of 2010's are generally better trained, more healthy, stronger, bigger, faster, have better technic, etc than those of 1960's, 1970's, 1980's. Besides in internet world teams behind boxers have much more knowledge about weakness and strongness of boxers. Knowledge of boxing is now better than ever before - even in times of Lenox Lewis. That's why there many things support this list of all time best heavyweight champions:

1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Wladimir Klitschko
3. Lenox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Muhammad Ali
6. Larry Holmes
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Sonny Liston
10. Rocky Marciano or Joe Louis

You can think about it by comparing athletics like Carl Lewis vs. Usain Bolt, Jim Hines vs. Carl Lewis or Bekele vs. Lasse Viren (Emil Zatopek vs. Paavo Nurmi). The problem is that we tend to appreciate too much these old time heroes with no critic at all.

On the other hand i have to say that Joe Louis in his time and Muhammad Ali in his time were surely showing much more skill and technic than any of their rivals at the same time of before. It's not their fault if knowledge of boxing, know how, is now much more better. It's just unfair to compare Muhammad Ali to Vitali Klitschko just as computer of 1950's to supercomputer of our time.

A lot of truth in this. What would be interesting is how the likes of Ali would've done if they did have the benefits of today that you describe.

[ICB]

I think sportmen of 2010's are generally better trained, more healthy, stronger, bigger, faster, have better technic, etc than those of 1960's, 1970's, 1980's. Besides in internet world teams behind boxers have much more knowledge about weakness and strongness of boxers. Knowledge of boxing is now better than ever before - even in times of Lenox Lewis. That's why there many things support this list of all time best heavyweight champions:

1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Wladimir Klitschko
3. Lenox Lewis
4. Mike Tyson
5. Muhammad Ali
6. Larry Holmes
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Sonny Liston
10. Rocky Marciano or Joe Louis

You can think about it by comparing athletics like Carl Lewis vs. Usain Bolt, Jim Hines vs. Carl Lewis or Bekele vs. Lasse Viren (Emil Zatopek vs. Paavo Nurmi). The problem is that we tend to appreciate too much these old time heroes with no critic at all.

On the other hand i have to say that Joe Louis in his time and Muhammad Ali in his time were surely showing much more skill and technic than any of their rivals at the same time of before. It's not their fault if knowledge of boxing, know how, is now much more better. It's just unfair to compare Muhammad Ali to Vitali Klitschko just as computer of 1950's to supercomputer of our time.

But someone like Vitali Klitschko is slower and robotic, and is nowhere near as athletic as the great Heavyweight's of the past. So i don't really understand your point.

[Dark Lord Al]

yes he certainly completed dominated Tua, boring as all hell as it was; but he couldnt really seriously hurt or let alone finish him. Tua fought un-gallantly and hardly took risks to press Lewis. My point is if a pressure fighter like Frazier or Tyson really pressed Lewis, good chins that they had of iron practically, and willing to take a few to give a few, how well would Lewis have dealt with 1988 Tyson? I dont know, Im just wondering what others think.

As for 1965 Clay being guff, well, listen, that dude WAS magic in that year, as in '66, '67 as well.

Bob Hayes was olimpic 100 m champion in 1964 , you think he would hold up against Usain Bolt ?
Clay was a top fighter but its ridiculous to think he would have beaten all of todays massive HW'S , the guy was out fought by glass jawed Ken Norton.
No way in hell he beats Lewis best of 3 , sorry i just dont buy the living in the past bullshit, yes some old time fighters who have to make weight could beat todays fighters of the same weight , but im sorry clay was a pup compared to Hw's like Lewis.

What a load of shit. A very old George Foreman who Ali KO'd in his absolute peak came back and won THE HW title in Lennox Lewis' era. Evander Holyfield was smaller than Ali and past his prime and still gave Lewis serious problems in the second fight. Ali would be champ in any era without doubt.

#no way , a guy who cant ko Ken Norton , isnt beating Lewis , i think the brothers grim would also fair well against so called greats of the past.
This isnt like comparing Ray Robinson to Hagler at 160 lbs , we are talking massive weight differences.

[Master]

Top 5 behind Ali, Loius, Holmes and Tyson

[ICB]

yes he certainly completed dominated Tua, boring as all hell as it was; but he couldnt really seriously hurt or let alone finish him. Tua fought un-gallantly and hardly took risks to press Lewis. My point is if a pressure fighter like Frazier or Tyson really pressed Lewis, good chins that they had of iron practically, and willing to take a few to give a few, how well would Lewis have dealt with 1988 Tyson? I dont know, Im just wondering what others think.

As for 1965 Clay being guff, well, listen, that dude WAS magic in that year, as in '66, '67 as well.

Bob Hayes was olimpic 100 m champion in 1964 , you think he would hold up against Usain Bolt ?
Clay was a top fighter but its ridiculous to think he would have beaten all of todays massive HW'S , the guy was out fought by glass jawed Ken Norton.
No way in hell he beats Lewis best of 3 , sorry i just dont buy the living in the past bullshit, yes some old time fighters who have to make weight could beat todays fighters of the same weight , but im sorry clay was a pup compared to Hw's like Lewis.

What a load of shit. A very old George Foreman who Ali KO'd in his absolute peak came back and won THE HW title in Lennox Lewis' era. Evander Holyfield was smaller than Ali and past his prime and still gave Lewis serious problems in the second fight. Ali would be champ in any era without doubt.

#no way , a guy who cant ko Ken Norton , isnt beating Lewis , i think the brothers grim would also fair well against so called greats of the past.
This isnt like comparing Ray Robinson to Hagler at 160 lbs , we are talking massive weight differences.

Former Cruiserweight Chris Byrd beat Vitali Klitschko.

[brocktonblockbust]

job biscuit (Johnson would have slaughtered Marciano)!!!

slob triscuit: {}

[brocktonblockbust]

a guy who cant ko Ken Norton , isnt beating Lewis

Shitty logic.. Its not all about KOs, is it? Guys who cant KO a fly can whip a KO artist. Guess you didnt see the Rumble in the Jungle.

[rjj tszyu]

yes he certainly completed dominated Tua, boring as all hell as it was; but he couldnt really seriously hurt or let alone finish him. Tua fought un-gallantly and hardly took risks to press Lewis. My point is if a pressure fighter like Frazier or Tyson really pressed Lewis, good chins that they had of iron practically, and willing to take a few to give a few, how well would Lewis have dealt with 1988 Tyson? I dont know, Im just wondering what others think.

As for 1965 Clay being guff, well, listen, that dude WAS magic in that year, as in '66, '67 as well.

Bob Hayes was olimpic 100 m champion in 1964 , you think he would hold up against Usain Bolt ?
Clay was a top fighter but its ridiculous to think he would have beaten all of todays massive HW'S , the guy was out fought by glass jawed Ken Norton.
No way in hell he beats Lewis best of 3 , sorry i just dont buy the living in the past bullshit, yes some old time fighters who have to make weight could beat todays fighters of the same weight , but im sorry clay was a pup compared to Hw's like Lewis.

What a load of shit. A very old George Foreman who Ali KO'd in his absolute peak came back and won THE HW title in Lennox Lewis' era. Evander Holyfield was smaller than Ali and past his prime and still gave Lewis serious problems in the second fight. Ali would be champ in any era without doubt.

#no way , a guy who cant ko Ken Norton , isnt beating Lewis , i think the brothers grim would also fair well against so called greats of the past.
This isnt like comparing Ray Robinson to Hagler at 160 lbs , we are talking massive weight differences.

As we are when we discuss Evander Holyfield but he fared well and he wasn't as technically gifted as Ali either. I bet you think Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman would have KO'd Ali too??

[brocktonblockbust]

I bet you think Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman would have KO'd Ali too??

yeah thats what he thinks. this guy is losing any respect he may have inched out lately. Holmes couldnt KO a 34 year old Norton. I bet he think Holmes was a "pup" too.