View Single Post
Old 08-21-2007, 05:40 PM   #22
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,120
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Holmes's Title Opposition, as **** as they say???

Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74
I have to disagree a little with what you said regarding Page, Thomas, e.t.c. While it's true that those guys were very inconsistent and unpredictable, they were also good fighters, especially when they were motivated and well-trained(which wasn't often, I'll admit). However, Holmes chose to fight other fighters who weren't well respected or who were not thought of highly - Frank, Jones, Rodriguez -when he just as readily could have fought Dokes, Page, Thomas, e.t.c. Greg Page was Holmes' mandatory; Holmes was obligated to fight Page and chose not to. Do you think if Marvis Frazier or Scott Frank or Lucien Rodriguez had ever been Holmes' mandatory that Larry would have avoided fighting them? Probably not. He more than likely would have fought them willingly. However, no matter what the skeptics or Holmes apologists say, Greg Page was a good fighter that had more skill than the above-mentioned fighters I just named. The same goes for Pinklon Thomas. Sure they were flawed and inconsistent, but they had natural talent that those other guys didn't. That's why Holmes found excuses not to fight them. Holmes was to get $3.1 million to fight Page; that was alot of money in 1983(Holmes got the same for Tyson in '8. But Holmes gave up his belt instead of fulfilling his mandatory. And it's strange how Holmes never gave Witherspoon a rematch after such a close fight; the same for Williams.
A fine post built on fact rather than excuse.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote