Lennox Lewis - His best win?

There's two ways to look at this. It's not like the heavyweight division blossomed after Lemmon left and Vitali took the world by storm. Most would agree that since Lemmon left this has been one of the worst periods in heavyweight boxing history.

You're left giving credit to Lemmon for beating a guy who dominated an awful era.

 

Agreed. A case could be made for Holyfield but I think it's Vitali, too.

 

So what? Just because the era's bad it doesn't mean Vitali is. Roy Jones dominated an awful light-heavyweight division, doesn't make him a bad fighter either. Vitali has done what he's supposed to do with these guys and that's win whilst barely losing a round.

 

His best win, imo, was the first Holyfield fight.... and the fact that it was a poorly judged Draw only helped Lennox further, especially in the USA. It completely detracted from the cautious gameplan Lennox employed and made him the legitimate heavyweight champion right then and there before actually getting the official verdict.

On paper I think Vitali is the best win, but re-watch that fight and the inconclusive nature takes away from the overall strength of the win, imo. Certainly as a crowning acheivement on his career, a 3-3 draw (at best) thru 6 with a doctor's stoppage is not appropriate.

aesthetically his best wins were ruddock and golota. symbolically, Rahman 2.

But overall Holyfield 1 was his best, imo

 

Without wishing to tread a well worn path, the Vitali win was pretty damn conclusive IMO. Vitali was in danger of being perminently injured as a result of some seriously heavy Lewis right hands.

I'd agree that the first Holy fight was Lennox's best win though.

MTF

 

It was a DRAW and so irrelevant.

We could say that Roy Jones was one of America's best and most dominant olympic champions..but the fact of the matter is...he only had the silver medal rightly or wrongly.

Lewis-Rahman 2 best win of his career, no question.

 

so true. if not for don kings influence lewis wouldve gotten the rightful decision there and everyone wouldve pointed to his underwhelming style and performance in that one especially after he loses the rematch

 

#

You are too kind to Lewis, but you make the point nonetheless.
Lewis turned in an ABJECT, horrible performance, far worse than Wlad vs Ibragimov where Wlad had won every round and where Ibragimov had come to survive.

Holyfield ambled forward obligingly and was hurt early and yet Lewis refused to press his advantages, pawed, procrastinated and allowed Holyfield back into the fight by basically giving away the 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th rounds. Lewis success in the 5th had been predicated on his punching Holyfield in the back of the head. Lewis drove Steward mad, and had Manny apoplectic and frothing at Lewis refusal to press his advantages.

With Holyfield having won the third, Lewis had set himself up for a draw at best. It was the perceived injustice that helped Lewis get away with it. Respected, if not liked, British journalists refused to buy into the notion of a fix, preferring to focus on the poor performance Lewis had turned in.

 

but he was arguably losing at the time and officially he was either down 4-2 or tied 3-3 in a brutal fight and if not for a right hand that happened to nick past vitali's eye and cut him.....

i suppose you can argue that no matter how many times they fight, Lennox will hit him with right hands that will probably cut him? I dunno. Seems kinda flimsy

 

I don't care a tuppance what some corrupt bitch has to say about a fight: Lennox won in the eyes of everyone bar that Williams clown and perhaps Stevie Wonder (though the latter still has Lennox by a point I'm told).

Anyhoo, Rahman II was his most aesthetically pleasing win for sure. That 1-2 was one of the best anyone will ever see and every now and again I youtube it to brighten my day a little. But the quality of the opponent detracts somewhat from it, notwithstanding the shock of the first fight, especially when you consider that Lennox holds wins over three very good/great HW's and a cluster of other solid titlists IMO.

MTF

 

Lewis win over Rahman is overshadowed by the fact that he should never have been fighting Rahman again, to begin with.

 

As I say, this is a VERY well trodden path which usually ends messily but the object of boxing isn't to win rounds: it is to hit your opponent often and hard enough that the fight is stopped (by whatever means). The scorecards only count if both men fail in this primary objective.

I thought the fight level after six (though 4-2 Vitali would have been acceptable too) but the sixth was Lennox's BIG and he was pummling Vitali with some huge shots. One of the cuts was certainly caused by a slashing sort of punch but Vitali had vagina's all over his face and he was shipping a hell of a lot of punches. The stoppage was completely correct: Vitali showed considerable bravery but simply couldn't continue in that state.

Ultimately, Lennox did what you are supposed to do- end the fight by stoppage caused by lots of hard punches.

MTF

 

Roy's a bad example...he beat future Hall of Famers along the way. Vitali can't say that. In fact, you'd say he lost to the only one he fought.

 

Aye

MTF

 

To me 'conclusive' means 'a rematch wouldn't be in much doubt'. You've concluded the argument as to who's better head to head.

Winning on the type of cut you see about once or twice a decade in championship boxing.....no.

 

This. And Feebs, I completely agree that Lennox damaged Vitali with his fists beyond repair for that night and there is no way around who won that fight (i also had it 3-3 and a decisive 6th for Lennox).

But when it comes to crowning a "best win" of his career, I look at the overall picture and this win is a bit hollow for me.

 

What that fight told me is that a younger, in shape and motivated Lewis beats Vitali every time. Vitali hit Lewis with the kitchen sink and couldn't budge him. He then proceeded to take a vicious beating and was almost preminently injured in the process.

That's conclusive for me.

MTF

 

You constantly hear Roy being mentioned as a great 175 pounder, which I agree with, but it certainly isn't based on the competition he beat there. Hitman is correct in that the Vitali win was inconclusive, yeah it's a legit loss and all but it was a loss on a cut in a fight he was winning. It most certainly warranted a rematch which he didn't get. If Mayweather-Pacquiao ended in the same fashion everyone would be calling for a rematch. Outside of Lewis, Vitali hasn't had a competitive fight. I think it's a great win and name for sure, but it was still inconclusive and hardly reflected bad on Vitali.

 

Lemmon-Vitali was a conclusive ending...what are you talking about? he couldn't continue due to multiple cuts caused by punches. Whether he was up on the scorecards is irrelevant...the doctor concluded he shouldn't continue.

Vitali wanting to continue is irrelevant...we all saw those cuts...we all saw how nasty they were. It wasn't controversial. It was a proper call.

Like Jake said, that fight helped Vitali more than Lemmon...he was regarded as a quitter up until that point. The damage he sustained who is to say he wouldn't have gotten KO'd. By the look of he and Lemmon, despite being up or even on the scorecards, it's easy to determine he suffered far greater damage than Lemmon.

 

You have DELIBERATELY missed the point as usual. The thing is...I KNOW that you're a very smart poster, and so you didn't happen to miss the point by accident. You're just being clever again.

Whether a cut was caused by a punch and whether or not the ref was justified in stopping the fight due to cuts is not the point in play here.

A fight ending cut in boxing is an anomaly, an outlier if you will...like an injured shoulder, cracked rib, broken hand or any other injury. If a fight is competitive and someone wins because of an anomaly...the ending is inconclusive in terms of who was the better fighter and the argument remains open.

Now you know that this is what is being alluded too, but since no one else probably will...I will call you on it.

 

Vitali was a badly underestimated opponent for Lewis to have while his career was at it's end, but that's part of what makes him the great that he is, he pulled it out, exploited Vitali's fairly ineffective defence against an opponent who both rivals his height and has a reach like an albatross which indeed Lewis had, he also hit fucking hard too.

I dont pay any attention to the excuse of him having only two weeks to prepare or he was 'old' though,.. Vitali is much older now than Lewis was then, and at that time Vitali could have been defined as being 'green', 'inexperienced' and had the same two weeks preparation,.. I think the excuses can cancel one another out,.. Lewis won, because he had a greater style to defeat tall or taller opponents, whereas Vitali style is built around him being the tallest in every fight he has, being 6ft 9,.. the only opponents he's fought who were tall were Timo Hoffman (which took him the distance) and Lewis, whom nailed him aplenty.

 

The Vitali win was SUPERB, make no mistake. I'd argue that Vitali was the best opponent of Lewis' entire career and Lewis defeated him in his very last fight. It was because of a cut..but it was a victory nonetheless.

 

An extremely rare occurance has happened. I agree with you 100%

MTF :crying:

 

Not one cut- a CLUSTER of deep, injurous wounds caused by Vitali shipping very hard, very accurate rights hands from Lennox Lewis: one of HW's hardest ever punchers. If you cannot get out of the way of your opponent's punches and they then cause EXTENSIVE facial damage which threatens to leave you BLIND so that the ringside doctor decides to stop the fight for your own safety, then you have lost conclusively. There is no other way to describe it.

MTF

 

Don't be silly Muzse, you know exactly what I'm talking about. The cut was caused by ONE punch, a fairly freak one at that. It was not conclusive in the slightest, just like Casa-Corrales 1 wasn't conclusive, it most certainly warranted a rematch. As I said before, if Mayweather-Pacquiao ended in the exact same fashion nobody would be satisfied with the outcome, because it wouldn't be conclusive. To use another example, when Ricky Hatton fought Jon Thaxton for the British title back in the day, Thaxton cut him BAD in the first 15 seconds, right over the eye. It was a fucking mess right till the end, but that was pretty much the only significant punch Thaxton landed the whole fight, Hatton proceeded to beat the shit out of him and won a UD, barely dropping a round. The cut was BAD though, and could have been stopped possibly with another referee. Now say it HAD been stopped, and Thaxton had his arm raised in victory, that would be sufficient for you? That would be a CONCLUSIVE victory and Thaxton would have proved he's the better man, despite losing practically every round and landing only one significant punch in 36 minutes? Come on.

 

Which cut? The one which is below the eye and which was as deep as hell or the actually on the eyelid which looks like it is hanging off or the one in the middle which is potentially disabling long term?

There wasn't ONE cut. That would make matters slightly more contentious I'd agree. But there is a cluster of cuts, all caused by punches and which turned Vitail into a gruesome, bloody mess.

It didn't take long for the thread to turn into this one again, did it?

MTF ::

 

Don't waste your time...Muzse and MTF are being disingenuous.

 

A fight stoppage, caused by a bad cut..isn't evidence that the winner was the better fighter, unless the winner was in control in any event.

In a few more seconds the Hearns-Hagler fight may have been stopped on cuts...cuts caused by Hearns' punches...had that happened would that fight have been judged by fans as a CONCLUSIVE ending I wonder...

 

How so? Look again at the picture: there isn't 'a cut'. There are numerous deep, dangerous GASHES all over and around the eye of Vitali. Three or four at least. This wasn't some controvertial cut which saw a fight stopped by some trigger happy referee, or some accidental head clash. It was a clear, uncontrovertial stoppage of a man who had been punched in the face numerous times and who had cuts as deep and as extensive as any that most observers could remember.

MTF :dunno:

 

perhaps klitschko shouldve recognized the urgency needed to win the fight, and went ahead and knocked lewis out as hagler did to hearns?