Is Lennox Lewis a top 10 heavyweight (from 606)

Since today appears to be a day of importing old articles from the old 606 and to prove I can discuss fighters who fought in colour thought I would offer up this one about Canada's finest ever fighter (saves you time Truss) Lennox Lewis

Appreciate this is one of those can of worms type of subjects on here but Lennox Lewis is one of those guys along with Frazier who I really struggle with when ranking the heavyweights, so would like to get some kind of opinions as to whether guys think he deserves to be considered a top ten heavyweight.

In his defence he only lost two times and both losess were avenged in decent fashion. Also at his best he could be a devastating guy, in fights such as Grant, Ruddock and Briggs and a guy who showed an ability to vary his tactics for the opponent such as in the Tua victory and finishing his career with a win over a guy who is widely accepted as the best of the next generation in Vitali at an age when most fighters are reaching for the pipe and slippers is IMO very impressive and probably doesn't get the credit it deserves.

Against Lewis is is level of opposition isn't great, but as a thread demonstrated yesterday that is probably true of many a heavyweight we consider great. Another rap which I feel is a bit harsh is that Lennox never fought a lot his natural rivals in their prime, although he can't be blamed Bowe chucked the belt in the bin or that Tyson went to prison and he did beat a version of Holyfield who proved through subsequent results he was not quite as finished as often portrayed.

Guess for me though the thing that really counts against Lennox is the two guys he lost against are really not from the top drawer, could probably forgive one loss to such a guy as we all know one punch can turn a heavyweight fight round at any time but to make the same mistake twice is sloppy in the extreme.

For me Lennox probably resides just outside the top ten but is the kind of guy I would have no issue with if guys want to include him in there, but he is a guy who I to and fro with a lot and so would be interested to see where other guys have him and if they have him in the top ten on what criteria they include him.

Morning rowley.

I dont know where to place Lewis either. But can you clarify how we base the ranking for ATG. Based on talent and achievement?

Sorry Jeff no time for a big reply at this moment, but for me, yes, definite top 10. Will explain my reasoning later hopefully.

azania wrote:Morning rowley.

I dont know where to place Lewis either. But can you clarify how we base the ranking for ATG. Based on talent and achievement?

How to rank them is a largley subjective and personal matter Az, for me it has to be a combination of longevity, talent, level of opposition and such factors. How much weight you give to each of these or other factors is one hell of a headache I personally can virtually never resolve. Should probably add based to a large degree on a lot of the arguments put forward when I posted this I now probably do have Lewis in the lower reaches of my top ten.

Quite like some proper articles replacing the she-ite we've had recently

As for Lewis

Always a very contentious one

One side of the coin is he never came close to losing barring 2 punches. People may point to his fight with Vitali, but he'd had his main oppo cancel on him and was overweight and unprepared for that fight - if Lewis had rematched he'd have toyed and clowned Vitali with ease if he showed up in shape and had his head screwed on.

He probably squeezes into my top 10, with Tyson and Holyfield being ommitted.

Lineup would be something like: (random order)

Dempsey
Marciano
Lewis
Ali
Johnson
Fitz
Foreman
Frazier
Holmes
Louis
Jeffries

Or somethinng like that

I'm afraid I share the same problem, jeff.

When I contemplate the best heavies the top seven always pick themselves, though the order changes every time I try to do it. Thereafter, I'm forever chasing my tail trying to sort out Tyson, Lewis, Holy, Liston and Frazier.

IBRO see it as you do, with Lennox getting twelfth spot and Tyson immediately behind.

My problem with Lewis is that he didn't always bring all his gifts together. When he did, he was a formidable fighter, but I can't shake the memories of the Mercer fight and the second Holyfield fight, in both of which he was outboxed for significant periods and didn't seem able to capitalize on his physical advantages. Factor in the fact that he was twice pole axed by single, albeit massive, punches and I can't help but feel that his claim to a place among the elite is weakened.

Comparisons with Tyson and Holyfield will always surface when we consider Lewis, and their proximity on the timeline makes it even trickier. Was Tyson's achievement in sweeping aside the heavyweight division in a manner not seen since Liston or Louis more impressive than Lewis' overall resumé ? Difficult to say.

Difficult, also, to pick a winner ( for me, anyway, ) if Tyson and Lewis had gone head - to - head, each on his best night. For my money it's a pick 'em, since Tyson might bomb Lewis out very early and Lewis might just as likely weather the early onslaught to break Tyson up and stop him late on.

Today, Lewis probably wouldn't break my top ten, overall. Tomorrow he probably will.

Few issues I have:

Struggling so much with Bruno and Mercer, possibly even lost the Mercer fight
The best Heavyweights he fought were past their best: Holyfield, Tyson, and never met Bowe although he wasn't to blame
Two of the worst losses in Heavyweight history
For much of his career he was far from a complete fighter

The good:

On his night he was very destructive and matches up well with anyone
A very good list of 'second tier' wins, and most dispatched impressively
Power, size, and a good range of punches
Quite adaptable, changed his tactics against Mercer and I think he was starting to gain the upper hand against Vitali
Avenged all his losses
Longevity

I think today I'd have him just outside, another day he may be in.

In terms of ahhievement I'l have him easily in my top 10. Are there 10 other HWs better than him? I believe so.

For instance he achieved more than Frazier and Liston but I'd have those 2 ahead of him as I believe they would both beat him.

Definite yes for me, although I'm an unashamed fan of the big man. With the exception of bowe he fought just about every top fighter of his era (possibly excluding big George too), finished having beaten everyone he'd ever fought, was a 3 time champ and undisputed champ in a reasonable era. If you look at the careers of most hw's the quality of opposition is mostly mediocre stuff masked with a few big fights as the division historically hasn't had as much quality in depth.

Lewis made two crucial errors in his career and his legacy suffers as a result, but at the very least he avenged those losses with Rahman coming in devastating, decisive style. Both defeats came at the end of long winning streaks where Lewis was clearly becoming complacent about his ability to beat anyone he faced, and that complacency cost him.

But overall based on what he achieved and my perception of his ability - deceptively quick, rangy, athletic, great jab, great uppercut, huge power in the right hand and textbook technical skills I'd have to have him top ten, with Ali, Louis, Dempsey, Holmes and Johnson ahead Lewis would be about 6th or 7th on my list.

I think at his best Lewis was capable of beating any hw from history given his size, skill and power.

Thats the thing SBS. Foreman is often ranked higher than he is in every ranking table you care to mention. But take a close look at Foreman's resume when he held the title. Who did he ever beat? Norton and Roman does not make you an ATG.

Oh and he beat Shultz. Give me a break. These rankings have an American bias anyway.

I do tend to have him in more often than not, as with Windy I have about seven or eight guys who are always in there such as Ali, Holmes, Jeffries, Louis, Dempsey, Marciano and Johnson who are lock ins for the top ten and then a bunch of guys such as Foreman, Lewis, Frazier, Liston Tunney etc who slug it out for the last few places.

At the minute would probably go with Foreman, Frazier and Lewis but it is tricky as I often think people are a little too quick to dismiss the losses to McCall and Rahman but as others have said they were both avenged in fine style but struggle to think of too many others top ten guys who have lost to such ordinary fighters during their reign and it is this that for me keeps him outside of the elite seven who are always guaranteed a slot

Like a good few on here I have him just in the top 10 around the 8 mark. I think at worst he should be in the top 15 for everyone.

Agree with SBS comments on him. Fought in a decent era and took one everyone he could. Has those two blemishes which stops him being in the top 5.

American's never really took to him which effect his rankings over that side of the pond.

Evening all, you picked a tough topic here -am a fan of Lewis myself but having succumbed to Reviseyourtoptenitus I have been scratching my head about Lewis.It's interesting to me that even if he is not in the top ten, it's a given he's in the top twelve according to you guys.
Personally, the losses issue doesn't mean too muc to me.Why?Because McCall and Rahman are nobody's idea of an all-time great.it's a given too that he was a lazy presumptious fool with those losses.Cliche time-you can beat the best in front of you at the time, and LL's era wasn't all that bad.
As discussed in a different thread about Bowe, funnily enough I think the ony guy who gives him headaches is Big Daddy. ..but that's all ifs and buts unfortunately. LL beats Holyfield seven or eight times out of ten (IMO) at any stage of Holy's HW career,and similarly with a post 1990 Tyson.
Would he have managed against a pre-90 Tyson? I can't see it. Would he have lived with Ali? Doubt it ,if his tactic from Holyfield fights are anything to go by.
I think Lennox should scrape into it...I think we've nailed it by slotting him somewhere between 9 and 12.
Now for an appraisal of George Foreman....

Incidentally Jeff, you say above , Johnson is a lock-in for your top seven....and there you were a few weeks ago, nearly convincing me that he was in need of down grading! Am seriously still mulling over that one...

Top 5 as far as i'm concerned, very few have his longevity and was despite popular believe the dominant heavyweight of his era, has two losses to less than stellar opposition but unlike many in a similar situation made amends. Has a lot of very good wins but no great wins but on record alone I can't name too many who could realistically be above him, also head to head have him losing to Louis, Ali, Foreman, Liston and Holmes baring that he's a clear favourite against the rest.

Taking all into account 4th behind Louis, Ali and Foreman

Andy Johnson sticks in my craw a bit because I'm a big Langford fan and his blatant avoidance of Sam really rankles. However in Jack's defence he was probably the best heavyweight in the world from the minute Jeffries retired and on the way up fought enough great fighters to have a genuinely impressive resume. It is after he won the title his ambition appeared to have waned somewhat but for me his pre title form coupled with what he did as champion probably still warrants a high ranking, but perhaps not the top three berth he is often afforded.

I can't see how he can't be in the Top 10 IMO.

Beat everyone he ever fought and chased after the people who beat him and avenged them, ok the 2nd McCall fight was odd but only due to McCall's brain!

regarding the Vitali fight, I think the fact the fight was stopped on cuts and Vitali was ahead is just used as an excuse and highlight videos edited to show a biased look (as many do) but Lewis had him in real trouble before it was stopped and I think would have stopped him if it continued. Also owing that Lewis was past his prime against arguably a prime Vitali shows he would have handled him more comprehensively if Lewis was a few years younger.

Personally I've never attempted to ever make a list as I find it to me an impossible task.

I shall stick with my list that I used to post on the Five Live boards on the beeb (before they turned to 606).

Lennox has always been IMO the No.2 best Heavyweight ever. I believe he comes out well on both length at the top, competition quality and in one on one match-ups against fellow greats.

He's the Greatest fighter to be born in Great Britain.

The man had fantastic Ring Generalship and had the key quality of adaptability. He had a very good jab, power, size and desire to fight the best. He travelled and wasn't a stay at home champion.

He won all domestic belts before moving onto the World scene and while some argue that he wasn't tough enough, he had some very hard competitive fights at different stages of his career. (Mason, Mercer and Klitschko)
I believe he sometimes underestimated opponents and this lead to his only two defeats, which he avenged.
In all his record speaks for itself and I only see Ali beating him.

Frazier, Holmes, Ali, etc, Lewis could fight and compete, beat any of those 3 on his night, he had everything, and beat everyone in the division, he's Britain's best ever boxer imo, and i think you could put a case for him being the best heavyweight ever, he had 2 setbacks but boy did he destroy both fighters in rematches.

The Mighty Atom wrote:Top 5 as far as i'm concerned, very few have his longevity and was despite popular believe the dominant heavyweight of his era, has two losses to less than stellar opposition but unlike many in a similar situation made amends. Has a lot of very good wins but no great wins but on record alone I can't name too many who could realistically be above him, also head to head have him losing to Louis, Ali, Foreman, Liston and Holmes baring that he's a clear favourite against the rest.

Taking all into account 4th behind Louis, Ali and Foreman

I dont se how you can rate GF ahead of Lewis. He had only 3 or 4 successful defences across both reigns. On achievement he shouldn't be in the top 10.

The two losses are fairly damaging to his legacy imo, especially when you comparing him to the likes of Ali, Holmes, Louis etc.

I also think he was fortunate (or unfortunate) that the elite HW's of the 90's were on the slide/shot by the time he reached his prime.
Due to the subsequent results and performances from Holyfield and Tyson, Lewis' wins against these two men hold little/no significance.

However, with his physical tools and ring craft, Lewis was no doubt a formidable fighter and a real challenge for any opponent. Overall, I believe that he has enough good wins on his record and the longevity to merit a top 10 spot.

Az

Foreman beating Frazier, Lyle and Norton is better than anything Lewis did.

That's why he's ranked higher.

Is pretty black and white for me personally

coxy0001 wrote:Az

Foreman beating Frazier, Lyle and Norton is better than anything Lewis did.

That's why he's ranked higher.

Is pretty black and white for me personally

Agreed.

coxy0001 wrote:Az

Foreman beating Frazier, Lyle and Norton is better than anything Lewis did.

That's why he's ranked higher.

Is pretty black and white for me personally

Beating Frazier certainly. Norton was good but made his name beating Ali (his style would always give Ali fits). But other than that whenever he came up against anyone good, he lost. He even lost to Cooney in 54 seconds.

I'll add that the version of Holy and Tyson Lewis beat would also have beaten Norton and Lyle.

Holy maybe, Tyson was a walking punchbag. Ali isn't a bad boxer to make your name beating and it isn't a shame losing to Foreman and Holmes.

Scottrf wrote:Holy maybe, Tyson was a walking punchbag. Ali isn't a bad boxer to make your name beating and it isn't a shame losing to Foreman and Holmes.

The problem with Norton is that when he is in against a known hard hitting HW, his self belief goes and he gets KO'd. Arguably Holmes is a harder hitting HW that Cooney, but Holmes was more a boxer. Norton took it and came back for some. But against Cooney who was only known for a left hook, he caved in. I'm sure there are a few other fights where he got laid out more times than a porn star.

"The man had fantastic Ring Generalship and had the key quality of adaptability. He had a very good jab, power, size and desire to fight the best. He travelled and wasn't a stay at home champion."

Rob, one thing you can never accuse Lennox of, is staying home too much.......

Well I consider the first Frazier victory as the most destructive in heavyweight boxing history so as a single victory it's second to none and Norton was a darn sight better than anyone Lewis faced with the exception of Holyfield and Tyson who were past their bests. Would add it's not Lewis' fault that these fights didn't happen sooner.

I wouldn't have him top 10 maybe 11 or 12. At his best he was very good. Solis jab good power and nice variety to his punches. The Tyson and Holyfield fights happened too late in their careers but that wasn't Lewis's fault. Maybe on another day he might make my top 10 but 9/10 times he would just miss out.

andygf wrote:
"The man had fantastic Ring Generalship and had the key quality of adaptability. He had a very good jab, power, size and desire to fight the best. He travelled and wasn't a stay at home champion."

Rob, one thing you can never accuse Lennox of, is staying home too much.......

Yep, he certainly liked spanking the yanks on their home turf.

Frankly Lewis bored me far too much for me to be objective......what the heck....outside the top ten.

No defining fight.....Bowe beat Holy twice.....Holy beat Tyson twice.....Holmes beat Mercer..Tyson beat Ruddock twice......

Then a lot of stiffs...

Certainly top 20 but i'm loathe to give top 10 to a guy Bruno was outboxing.

andygf wrote:
"The man had fantastic Ring Generalship and had the key quality of adaptability. He had a very good jab, power, size and desire to fight the best. He travelled and wasn't a stay at home champion."

Rob, one thing you can never accuse Lennox of, is staying home too much.......

Perhaps because he didn't know where home was.

Lewis would of destroyed Foreman, Lewis had 10 defences at 1 point. Also beat Holyfield twice, wanted Bowe but he wouldnt fight him, destroyed everyone in the division in his wake, its laughable how Foreman can be put in the same breath imo, Lewis would of destroyed him

Lennox is surely up there!

With no disrespect to the fighters I know little about, Lewis was the dominate heavyweight once he hit his prime and beat every guy faced becoming undisputed champion - the goal of every fighter!

Yes the two losses were damaging but the manner of the wins corrected them and showed he only lost because he got lazy, not because the others were better - Rahman in particular!

TumblingDice wrote:Lennox is surely up there!

With no disrespect to the fighters I know little about, Lewis was the dominate heavyweight once he hit his prime and beat every guy faced becoming undisputed champion - the goal of every fighter!

Yes the two losses were damaging but the manner of the wins corrected them and showed he only lost because he got lazy, not because the others were better - Rahman in particular!

When was his prime?

Why is there always an excuse for Lewis' defeats?

He beat Oliver Mac in the rematch because Mac went mental in the ring. It had little with Lewis beating him. Even with his hands down and giving lewis free shots the man didn't even blink.

Im always amazed how much he polarises opinion.

Even his biggest critics would have to entertain that he has an argument to be in the top ten. His biggest fans would have to acknowledge theres an argument against him also.

For me he falls into the 5-12 bracket with 5 being the absolute highest I could entertain having him and 12 being the absolute lowest. Anywhere in between I wouldnt really argue.

manos de piedra wrote:Im always amazed how much he polarises opinion.

Even his biggest critics would have to entertain that he has an argument to be in the top ten. His biggest fans would have to acknowledge theres an argument against him also.

For me he falls into the 5-12 bracket with 5 being the absolute highest I could entertain having him and 12 being the absolute lowest. Anywhere in between I wouldnt really argue.

In terms of achievement he should be in the top 10. But in terms of if there are others who are better than him, he will be in top 20.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Im always amazed how much he polarises opinion.

Even his biggest critics would have to entertain that he has an argument to be in the top ten. His biggest fans would have to acknowledge theres an argument against him also.

For me he falls into the 5-12 bracket with 5 being the absolute highest I could entertain having him and 12 being the absolute lowest. Anywhere in between I wouldnt really argue.

In terms of achievement he should be in the top 10. But in terms of if there are others who are better than him, he will be in top 20.

What ten fighters do you think beat him on probability, or are better than him?

Ali
Liston.
Foreman,
Frazier.
Holmes
Louis
Tyson
Bowe
Holyfield
Vitali

Lewis's problem for me is his lack of footwork. He looks clumsy at best. His jab is more of a push and paw. He packed a wallop though. He is on par with Vitali imo.

azania wrote:Ali
Liston.
Foreman,
Frazier.
Holmes
Louis
Tyson
Bowe
Holyfield
Vitali

Wow, even Joe "I cant hit a moving speedbag" Louis is ahead of him now.

I think you could make cases for most of those guys - difficult with Vitali I think given he lost to a past his best Lewis.

Id take Lewis over Frazier,Liston and Holyfield though.

Bowe/Tyson/Louis are 50/50s for me.

Id give Foreman/Ali/Holmes the beating of Lewis.

How on earth does Vitali beat Lewis?

azania wrote:Ali
Liston.
Foreman,
Frazier.
Holmes
Louis
Tyson
Bowe
Holyfield
Vitali

Bowe who refused to fight him, dumping his belt in the bin

Vitali who he beat, and the same vitali who wont be undisputed champ

Holyfield, who he should of beaten twice, if it werent for one of the worst decisions in recent times.

For me Lewis just sneaks into the top ten heavyweights. Foreman rated him pretty highly and I think he would have the beating of Frazier Bowe and Vitali and as for saying his jab was just a push wellhe set up many a finishing right with it.

Hi all. First post for me. Long time reader but finally decided to take the plunge.

Lennox is a difficult one for me, in some respects I would place him in the top 10 but I can easily see why people would place him outside. He had obvious physical attributes and beat everyone in his era but the two damaging defeats, despite the fact they were both avenged, and the fact that he caught Tyson/Holyfield towards the end of their careers can be used against his inclusion.

When viewing him on a head to head basis then I would, on balance, include him in the top ten because in my opinion a fully focused Lennox had the tools and mental strength to give most incumbents a difficult night, especially once Steward had got hold of him and smoothed out some of the more amatuer aspects of his style.

One thing I can say with certainty though......looking at the state of the division now, I wish we still had him around these days!

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:Hi all. First post for me. Long time reader but finally decided to take the plunge.

Lennox is a difficult one for me, in some respects I would place him in the top 10 but I can easily see why people would place him outside. He had obvious physical attributes and beat everyone in his era but the two damaging defeats, despite the fact they were both avenged, and the fact that he caught Tyson/Holyfield towards the end of their careers can be used against his inclusion.

When viewing him on a head to head basis then I would, on balance, include him in the top ten because in my opinion a fully focused Lennox had the tools and mental strength to give most incumbents a difficult night, especially once Steward had got hold of him and smoothed out some of the more amatuer aspects of his style.

One thing I can say with certainty though......looking at the state of the division now, I wish we still had him around these days!

Welcome about mate

Agreed fully with your last sentence.

The Mighty Atom wrote:How on earth does Vitali beat Lewis?

By hitting him very often.

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:Ali
Liston.
Foreman,
Frazier.
Holmes
Louis
Tyson
Bowe
Holyfield
Vitali

Wow, even Joe "I cant hit a moving speedbag" Louis is ahead of him now.

I think you could make cases for most of those guys - difficult with Vitali I think given he lost to a past his best Lewis.

Id take Lewis over Frazier,Liston and Holyfield though.

Bowe/Tyson/Louis are 50/50s for me.

Id give Foreman/Ali/Holmes the beating of Lewis.

Vit was ahead before the cuts. Moreover he took Lewis's best shots without wobbling whereas Lewis wobbled. I believe all things being equal, Vit shades it for me.

I wouldn't take Lewis over a peak Holy. A way past it Holy gave him hell. Lewis became very gun shy following his defeats. I dont believe he trusted his chin. Against Holy he would have to go to the trenches and will be found wanting. Frazier was a better version of Holy and beats Lewis all day imo. Tyson would have been a 2 round blow out.