Lennox
Lewis' four round destruction of Hasim Rahman in Las Vegas has given Lewis the
twin satisfaction of revenging his loss to Rahman and garnered him a third
heavyweight championship.
But
whether this will enable him to take his place among the pantheon of all-time
great heavyweight champions is quite another matter.
Rahman's
knock out of Lewis, seven months earlier in South Africa, as unexpected and as
shocking a defeat by a journeyman fighter of an incumbent champion as ever
happened, will go down as one of boxing's great upsets along with James
Braddock's win over Max Baer and James 'Buster' Douglas' knock out of Mike
Tyson.
Yet,
the suspicion is that Lewis, who is universally regarded as having taken Rahman
and his training regime much too lightly in the earlier contest, was merely
restoring the natural order of things by winning a title which he should not
have lost in the first place.
Many
have argued before the return bout that even a win against Rahman would not be
enough to rank him among the heavyweight elite of the ages. Is this
fair or foul?
In
attempting to assess Lewis' reputation in the scheme of boxing history, it is
useful to note that most great fighters and exceptional ones at that, do not
appear to be granted the esteem and kudos which they deserve until well beyond
their fighting careers. As with characters in history, the reputations of
pugilists ascend and diminish with the passage of time.
'To
historians is granted a talent that even the gods are denied -to alter what has
already happened' goes a rather cynical adage.
And
boxing is no different.
Peruse
the corpus of decades old boxing journals and one is struck by the contrast in
early estimations of fighters like Sugar Ray Robinson with contemporary schools
of thought. Robinson tended to be ranked below the likes of Stanley Ketchel and
Harry Grebb up to a decade and a half after his career ended.
A
similar pattern appears with Ali. Even after his 'impossible' achievement of
relieving George Foreman of his championship in 1974, one poll of 'experts' in
the middle 1970's ranked Ali below Jack Dempsey.
The
picture today, is vastly different. Few would fail to grant Robinson the
accolade of the greatest fighter in history while only Joe Louis and
occasionally Jack Johnson are ever ranked over Ali.
The
measurement of greatness is ultimately a subjective exercise. Athletic prowess
and techniques develop over the course of time and this is a quite pertinent
issue where the heaviest division in the boxing game is concerned such that it
becomes ludicrous to believe that Jack Dempsey could ever cope with a modern,
substantively weighing and competent heavyweight.
The
same goes for Rocky Marciano. (Does any sane, rational person truly believe
that taking size and styles in to consideration, that Marciano could have
beaten Sonny Liston?) So, one may turn to the criteria of being consistently
the best in your era.
Here
few could match Marciano. Still, subjectivity does not preclude an attempt at
referring to objective standards. How we should ask ourselves does Lennox Lewis
compare in relation to quality of opposition, power of punch, stamina, ability
to absorb a punch and longevity of career?
Variously
described as 'lackadaisical'. 'amateurish' and plain 'boring' Lewis' style does
not lend itself to the panegyrics used to describe many a great fighter. Lacking
the fire and relentlessly aggressive ploys of a Dempsey, the classical punch
combinations of a Louis, the workhouse ethic of a Marciano or the
improvisational brilliance of an Ali, Lewis' boxing methodology provides little
for us to summarise into a clearly definable type.
But
Lewis is more substantive a fighting character than many a heavyweight in
history. Even the great Larry Holmes had a 'style' which taken alone was not
particularly exciting to watch.
As
a puncher, Lewis has on occasion, and not nearly enough for the liking of many
who feel his bountiful physical advantages should have enabled him to better
employ more frequent manifestations of forceful punching, displayed a ferocity
that verges on the best one could hope a great champion could display. The
destructions of Razor Ruddock, Andrew Golota and now Hasim Rahman attest to
this.
As
far as stamina is concerned many will remain sceptical at his abilities here
given that he has finished many twelve round bouts fairly laggardly and open
mouthed when the likes of Ali and Louis gamely completed the then mandatory
fifteen round championship distance on numerous occasions. In respect of
longevity, Lewis it should be said has done well. Plying his trade as a top
echelon heavyweight for over a decade is no mean feat.
However,
Lewis' knock out losses to journeymen mediocrities of the ilk of Oliver McCall
and Hasim Rahman serve as a serious impediment when one considers the issue of
the fighter’s ability to take a punch.
Joe
Louis was knocked out early in his career by a seasoned but far from aged
former world champion Max Schemeling. Muhammad Ali was never knocked out
period. And even if Larry Holmes spared him this indignity, Ali's stoppage loss
to Holmes occurred when he was very well past his best and essentially in poor
health.
The
other serious drawback for Lewis relates to that criterion which is concerned
with 'quality of opposition.' But here one must exercise caution before sailing
to judgement.
The
reason is quite simple: It was not Lewis' fault that he did not face the best
at their best. Boxing politics, rape convictions and legitimate inferences that
he was avoided at critical junctures by both Riddick Bowe and Mike Tyson all
conspired to deny Lewis the opportunity of stamping his authority on this era
of boxing.
It
is true that some great fighters famously never met.
Jake
La Motta for one, never swapped blows with Rocky Graziano and Ken Norton never
got it on with Joe Frazier. Yet, it may be argued that these gaps are nowhere
as palpably gnawing as the lacunae that Lewis' reputation will endure in future
historiography.
The
only comparison which comes to mind concerns the non-fight between
featherweight champions Azumah Nelson and Barry McGuigan. That omission was a
symptom no doubt of boxing politics. (It should be noted in all frankness that
Nelson would have being favoured to win that bout and that McGuigan, whom the
Ghanaian took to referring as "she", was straightjacketed by his
manager Barney Eastwood who did not fancy much his charges chances.)
It
is difficult to see how Lewis can surmount this. Bowe, at one time a worthy
looking champion who had lost to Lewis while as amateurs, rapidly deteriorated
and is deep in retirement. Tyson, on the other hand, was felt by many to be in
a steep decline even before his enforced absence from the boxing scene.
Lewis,
it can be argued, is part of an 'unfulfilled' era; one that is, in which each
of the participants by virtue of talent and potential might conceivable have
come close to rivalling the earlier era of Ali, Frazier, Foreman and Holmes.
Indeed,
the imagination marvels -and laments at the glories boxing has missed had
circumstances allowed for Lewis to meet Bowe and Tyson when the former was at
the peak of his game and the latter would still have being something at his
peak.
As
it stands, Lewis may have to settle for the consolation prize of the latter day
Mike Tyson. It has been suggested that such a fight might while falling short
of creating the legendary stature of a true great might anoint the victor with
the lesser honorific of 'greatest fighter of his generation.' Where that leaves
Evander Holyfield, twice a victor over Tyson and a disputed loser to Lewis in
their return bout, is another matter.
Lennox
Lewis should be lauded for his win over Rahman. It is always difficult to
comeback. It took around seventy years of Marquis of Queensbury Rules boxing
for a heavyweight champion to regain his title. During this time figures like
Dempsey, Baer, Schemeling, Walcott and Charles all failed. He may go on to
conquer Mike Tyson but the overwhelming consensus among the boxing's scribes
and soothsayers appears to indicate that this would merely be a
"salvaging" exercise.
One,
that is, which will have no effect on his goal of being ranked with the likes
of Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali. A three-time world champion he may be but with
two seemingly needless losses on his record and the fact that his talent
sojourns within the alphabet soup era and a time of meddling boxing politics,
Lennox Lewis had all the odds stacked against him.
History
it appears may judge him harshly for this.
(C) Adeyinka Makinde
(2001)
No comments:
Post a Comment