Lennox Lewis vs the Greats Part one

First topic message reminder :

Lennox Lewis vs Muhammad Ali

Muhammad Ali although the greatest heavyweight of all time never faced a boxer who was as good as Lennox Lewis who had the power, jab, adaptability and boxing skills to match anyone. Foreman hit harder than Lewis but didn’t have the boxing skills to beat Ali and win the tactical exchange but he would struggle with an intelligent boxer like Lewis. Ali would win rounds against Lewis with his speed and combinations but I think Lewis would get the better off him with his pistol like jab while landing right hands and uppercuts. Ali’s granite chin and heart sees him to the finish whilst taking the most punishment in his career but Lewis takes a close decision.

KO? A full KO is failing to be up within 10s

A TKO occurs if the boxer is unable to stand on his feet, put his gloves up and walk forward to show he is on steady legs.

Lewis stood to his feet, put his gloves up and fell into the ref.

Ergo fair stoppage.

A ref uses common sense to judge whether a fighter can continue. Common sense can be blurred when you have a fat brown envelope stuffed in your back pocket.

Lewis had his guard up andf was saying he was ok. Saw it at the weekend.

I think the way people are just assuming that the referee was on King's payroll is beyond ridiculous, and only serves to conveniently ignore that Lewis got himself in all sorts of trouble against an opponent who he should have comfortably done away with.

Lewis did get his gloves up, granted, but that's cancelled out (at least in my eyes) by the fact that he was still swaying all over the place. Let's not forget that the referee had the advantage of looking in to Lewis' eyes, too. If they were glazed over then it's entirely reasonable for him to stop it.

As I say, I don't have any problem with people thinking that Lewis maybe could have continued. But to act as if it was a poor stoppage is a joke. Even if you disagree with it, surely you must accept that it was at least understandable? Amir Khan had his gloves up after the first knockdown against Prescott, but I think it's fair to say that he was in no state to continue there, either.

Sean the suggestion the ref was on the payroll is a little offensive. Even if you think the stoppage was premature, which the responses on here would suggest puts you in the minority nobody could really argue it was the most outlandish stoppage of all time. Given this an unfounded accusation of an official with zero evidence to support the theory is unfair IMO.

If he was on Kings payroll then he didnt have to do much to earn his money, Lennox did that for him when he got himself clocked and was stumbling.

As has been stated, fights have been stopped far earlier, granted some have been stopped much later but surely the fact this lies somewhere inbetween suggests that in this case it was a pretty fair decision.

88Chris05 wrote:I think the way people are just assuming that the referee was on King's payroll is beyond ridiculous, and only serves to conveniently ignore that Lewis got himself in all sorts of trouble against an opponent who he should have comfortably done away with.

Lewis did get his gloves up, granted, but that's cancelled out (at least in my eyes) by the fact that he was still swaying all over the place. Let's not forget that the referee had the advantage of looking in to Lewis' eyes, too. If they were glazed over then it's entirely reasonable for him to stop it.

As I say, I don't have any problem with people thinking that Lewis maybe could have continued. But to act as if it was a poor stoppage is a joke. Even if you disagree with it, surely you must accept that it was at least understandable? Amir Khan had his gloves up after the first knockdown against Prescott, but I think it's fair to say that he was in no state to continue there, either.

But there's no argument about Khan's stoppage. He was sparked 10-15 seconds later. No long term damage. etc. Lewis was in his prime, it was a poor stoppage.

If you read how he was frozen out of the scene after that it does smell of a rat.

Michaels, Sean wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I think the way people are just assuming that the referee was on King's payroll is beyond ridiculous, and only serves to conveniently ignore that Lewis got himself in all sorts of trouble against an opponent who he should have comfortably done away with.

Lewis did get his gloves up, granted, but that's cancelled out (at least in my eyes) by the fact that he was still swaying all over the place. Let's not forget that the referee had the advantage of looking in to Lewis' eyes, too. If they were glazed over then it's entirely reasonable for him to stop it.

As I say, I don't have any problem with people thinking that Lewis maybe could have continued. But to act as if it was a poor stoppage is a joke. Even if you disagree with it, surely you must accept that it was at least understandable? Amir Khan had his gloves up after the first knockdown against Prescott, but I think it's fair to say that he was in no state to continue there, either.

But there's no argument about Khan's stoppage. He was sparked 10-15 seconds later. No long term damage. etc. Lewis was in his prime, it was a poor stoppage.

If you read how he was frozen out of the scene after that it does smell of a rat.

The point is, if Khan had been stopped after the first knockdown, would you be arguing that it was a poor stoppage, given that the circumstances were almost exactly the same as the Lewis-McCall affair? (No world title on the line of course, but Khan was still very much the name in that bout).

I doubt it. We're not talking about what happened in the aftermath of the fight, either. Lewis being 'frozen out' as you put it is irrelevant. Sorry, I just can't abide by this idea that Lewis was hard done by and that the loss was no fault of his own. He got careless, got caught, and it's a simple fact that he was still very, very unsteady on his feet and in trouble when the referee stopped it.

You say Khan's was identical. He was pretty much a novice and very young. If (it wasn't) it was stopped the first time the ref could have backed up his decision with this argument.

A better comparison is Wlad v Peter. Wlad was all over the place, far worse than Lewis.

I think it is foolhardy to suggest there wasn't an agenda against Lewis and his camp. He got screwed a lot in America.

Lewis was not is his prime at the time of McCall 1. Far from it.

As for being "frozen out" in the aftermath. Not really. He had to rebuild and had just hired Steward as a trainer to develop him further. He was given an immediate eliminator bout an then was able to rematch McCall a few fights later when he was prepared.

manos de piedra wrote:Lewis was not is his prime at the time of McCall 1. Far from it.

As for being "frozen out" in the aftermath. Not really. He had to rebuild and had just hired Steward as a trainer to develop him further. He was given an immediate eliminator bout an then was able to rematch McCall a few fights later when he was prepared.

Agree with this.

Even though I would have likes to have seen Lewis given a few more seconds to see if he could have gained his senses you cant have any complaints with the stoppage. More a case of Lewis taking his eye off the ball.

That what irritates me the most about Lennox... his concentration drops when it comes to facing an opponent who he feels doesn't pose much of a threat to him. The way in which Lewis brutally avenged boss losses shows that the man should have really finished with a zero in the loss column, which would have propelled up nearer the top 5 heavies in the ATG lists IMO.

manos de piedra wrote:Lewis was not is his prime at the time of McCall 1. Far from it.

As for being "frozen out" in the aftermath. Not really. He had to rebuild and had just hired Steward as a trainer to develop him further. He was given an immediate eliminator bout an then was able to rematch McCall a few fights later when he was prepared.

29 months later? If Wlad gets knocked out in July and carries on, when do you think his next shot will be? Lewis / Maloney etc all brought this up in the documentary leading up to the Holyfield fight.

Michaels, Sean wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Lewis was not is his prime at the time of McCall 1. Far from it.

As for being "frozen out" in the aftermath. Not really. He had to rebuild and had just hired Steward as a trainer to develop him further. He was given an immediate eliminator bout an then was able to rematch McCall a few fights later when he was prepared.

29 months later? If Wlad gets knocked out in July and carries on, when do you think his next shot will be? Lewis / Maloney etc all brought this up in the documentary leading up to the Holyfield fight.

In fairness though, Wladimir is 'the man' in the Heavyweight division. Lewis wasn't that in 1994, and wasn't really close to being it, either. He had no God-given right to get an instant rematch / another title fight off the back of the McCall defeat. I agree that he should have contested for the WBC belt against either Lewis or Tyson in 1996, but I don't see anything wrong with the way he had to rebuild throughout 1994 and 1995.

It is pure lunacy to call the McCall fight a premature stoppage.

He looked like a one year old staggering towards his mother's arms when the ref asked him to take a step forwards.

If it had continued the next punch might have shortened Lewis's career.

Fair play to Lennox he suffered the defeat and then got himself a fight against the No.1 contender, Lionel Butler. Butler, while limited, had racked up a few good Ko wins and was considered a dangerous puncher.

Lennox then had to bide his time as the title changed hands and kept busy beating Fortune, Morrison and Mercer.
Tyson got his hands on the title, paid Lennox a huge amount in step aside money (4 to 6 million dollars) when being persued through the courts by Lennox. Tyson then relinqueshed the WBC rather than face Lennox.

Lennox then finally got to fight for his old crown in a Vacant title fight against McCall. He had waited almost 2 years after he won the Eliminator to get his shot.

The Lewis/McCall stoppage was definitely correct. Lewis was stumbling about like a drunk at last orders.

Also, although there is nothing officially in the rules of boxing, I have to disagree with people saying that the fight is on equal footing after the belt leaves the ring. Generally people accept that a challenger might have to work harder than a champion and also...taking the recent Nonito Donaire vs Montiel fight as an example, that the champion may be more likely to get the benefit of the doubt after being put down, as I certainly would have called the fight off when Montiel was flopping about like a fish.

Champion benefit of the doubt....

unless the challenger is.....

Mexican - WBC
South American - WBA
British - WBO..

More like it..

In fairness, the Montiel-Donaire showdown was a unification battle. A referee's only obligation is the safety of the fighter, champion or not. I always thought that the convention, in any case, was that once the fighters reach the ring, the titles are at hazard and there is no champ. That's what all the business with parading the belts is supposed to be about.

Truss, you seem to have been unusually combative today...how about putting those argumentative skills to good use by proffering your opinions on the latest Hall of Fame quintet?

Will do..

captain carrantuohil wrote:In fairness, the Montiel-Donaire showdown was a unification battle. A referee's only obligation is the safety of the fighter, champion or not. I always thought that the convention, in any case, was that once the fighters reach the ring, the titles are at hazard and there is no champ. That's what all the business with parading the belts is supposed to be about.

Truss, you seem to have been unusually combative today...how about putting those argumentative skills to good use by proffering your opinions on the latest Hall of Fame quintet?

No it wasn't. Donaire didn't have any belt going into the fight. Or am I mistaken? I was sure Montiel was WBC and WBO holder.

No, you're quite right. I'm off to sit in the corner with a conical cap on my head. Why did I think that Donaire had the WBO belt already? Tisk. Anyhow, the rest of my point stands - no champions once the action is underway.

That's how I agree it should be, but the reality can be different. Montiel should not have been allowed to continue and had he been the challenger I doubt he would have been. The HBO commentator, I believe it was RJJ, also said he thought that the only reason Montiel seemed to be allowed to continue after the first knockdown was due to the ref giving the champion the benefit of the doubt and a chance to hold onto his belt.

The ref looked as though he was a bit confused to me. It was almost as though he thought better of his initial decision after Donaire started to unload on the utterly defenceless Montiel. It was poor refereeing any way you look at it; I think we've also seen challengers granted too much time to get hammered as well, mind you - my mind goes back to Barrera beating seven bells out of Paul "Livewire" Lloyd some years back - not quite sure what the ref was waiting for that day.

I'm not familiar with that fight so I'll have a look on youtube.

Just took another look now. I swear the whole three minutes makes you wince. The referee was even more useless than I remembered as well.

That was bloody brutal.

Nice, wasn't it? Poor lad had no business being in the ring with MAB in the first place, of course, but it just goes to show that brave challengers need to be protected from themselves at times. A bad referee is a dangerous referee.

Definitely. MAB was just vicious! I was pretty sure I could hear quite a loud thud from a lot of the punches that were landing as well.

Speaking of a bad referee being a dangerous one, in the last year or two I can't think of a single more appropriate example than Erkki Meronen's handling of Maccarinelli-Frenkel last year.

There's poor refereeing, and then there's absolutely disgusting refereeing. His performance in that fight fell in to the latter category. The man was a former professional himself, for Christ's sake. How or why he ever allowed Maccarinelli to continue after that knock down, I'll never know.

I know it doesn't tug at many people's heartstrings much, but I felt that the referee's refusal to stop Margarito vs Pacquaio was questionable to say the least.

Anyway, I'm off on a tangent here. I haven't really contributed to the main topic of discussion! I think I'd go with the consensus though and have Ali winning, too quick, higher workrate, fantastic chin. Lewis would have a chance, but it would be that of an outsider.