Greater Resume: Lewis or Holmes?

[mr. magoo]

Lewis had greater variety and is also and ATG.

I agree that Lewis also deserves to be considered an all time great, but not that he had greater variety to his resume. Most of the men he fought were past prime versions of good fighters, or just not that great to begin with. What's more, he either lost or looked horribly unimpressive against Oliver Mccall, Hasim Rahman, a 36 year old Holyfield and a 35 year old Mercer. Holmes defeated a slightly past prime Norton, who was an all time great, and still a very good fighter in 1978. Earnie Shavers was pretty close to being at his best, and was possibly the hardest hitter in history. Cooney was a 25-0 prospect, who stood 6'7" during a time when most fighters didn't. Witherspoon, Berbick, Weaver and Smith were all young hopefuls who would soon go on to winning titles and having long successful careers. Mercer was a 30 year old Olympic gold medalist, coming off of the two best wins of his career against Tommy Morrison ( 28-0-0-24 ) and Francesco Damiani ( 27-0-0-23. ) Holmes at 42, showed incredible ring saavy and talent in totally shutting out mercer over 12 rounds. In 1996, a 30 year old Lewis fought a 34 year old Mercer, who hadn't won a meaningful bout in nearly 3 years, and some felt Lewis was given a gift decision!!!!

You'll have to excuse my bluntness, but there ain't no ****in' way Lennox Lewis had a better resume or career legacy than Larry Holmes.

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius

Lewis has an all-round better resume and his best win (dominated a 36 year old Holyfield) is better than Holmes' best win (close win over an aging Norton).

That's highly debatable.

[Duodenum]

Holmes, in large part due to his extraordinary, and utterly unanticpated longevity. It should also be remembered that Holmes dominated Mercer over 12 rounds, nearly three years before Moorer was dethroned by Foreman (who needed a come from behind one-punch kayo to win the title).

Larry came off the deck to stop Shavers and Snipes. Lewis couldn't do it against McCall and Rahman. As an undefeated boxer, Holmes won 20 consecutive championship matches, and successfully defended the title in eight consecutive calendar years. Like Lewis, Holmes sustained only two decisive losses on his resume: to Tyson and Holyfield. Against a peak Tyson, Holmes was noticably rusty, and with his timing off after nearly two years of retirement. Yet even at age 38, he was competitive against one of the fastest starting champions in HW history for nearly three and a half rounds. Against a peak undefeated Holyfield, at age 42, he lost a contact lens (!), yet still managed to defend himself well enough to go the distance.

Holmes was the de facto universal champion. He kayoed Weaver, and shut out Cobb, after Tex had narrowly lost a split decision to Dokes (who was considered the number two HW at the time). Insofar as Lewis and Holyfield enjoyed official recognition as undisputed HW Champions, the lion's share of that credit belongs to Tyson, for consolidating the title to begin with. (For his part, Holyfield consolidated the Cruiserweight Title, and established his 15 round pedigree against Qawi.)

Holmes recorded victories over the following world title claimants:

Norton
Ocasio (Eventual WBA Cruiserweight Champion)
Weaver (2X)
Ali
Berbick (By shutout)
Leon Spinks
Witherspoon
Smith (2X)
Mercer (WBO Heavyweight Champion and Olympic Gold medalist)

Holmes defeated five future champions (Ocasio, Weaver, Berbick, Witherspoon and Smith).

Holmes eliminated the following from the unbeaten ranks:

Ocasio
Leroy Jones
Snipes
Cooney
Witherspoon
Frank
Marvis Frazier
Bey
Williams
Mercer

(Lewis defeated four unbeatens.)

Holmes won matches over a period of nearly thirty years, and when in his forties, was far more impressive against a peak McCall and Mercer than a prime Lennox was, also much more impressive against a young Ocasio than the young Lewis was against an aged Ocasio. Due to circumstances beyond Lewis's control, Holmes also has the 15 round pedigree Lennox never had the chance to establish for himself.

Finally, there's a saying that, "As goes the heavyweights, so goes boxing." The sport was never bigger than it was in the early 1980s, and Holmes was the HW Champion in Ali's wake during those heady halcyon days in its history. Lewis was one of those who presided over boxing's decline and fall as a mainstream attraction.

[Titan1]

Originally Posted by Duodenum

Holmes, in large part due to his extraordinary, and utterly unanticpated longevity. It should also be remembered that Holmes dominated Mercer over 12 rounds, nearly three years before Moorer was dethroned by Foreman (who needed a come from behind one-punch kayo to win the title).

Larry came off the deck to stop Shavers and Snipes. Lewis couldn't do it against McCall and Rahman. As an undefeated boxer, Holmes won 20 consecutive championship matches, and successfully defended the title in eight consecutive calendar years. Like Lewis, Holmes sustained only two decisive losses on his resume: to Tyson and Holyfield. Against a peak Tyson, Holmes was noticably rusty, and with his timing off after nearly two years of retirement. Yet even at age 38, he was competitive against one of the fastest starting champions in HW history for nearly three and a half rounds. Against a peak undefeated Holyfield, at age 42, he lost a contact lens (!), yet still managed to defend himself well enough to go the distance.

Holmes was the de facto universal champion. He kayoed Weaver, and shut out Cobb, after Tex had narrowly lost a split decision to Dokes (who was considered the number two HW at the time). Insofar as Lewis and Holyfield enjoyed official recognition as undisputed HW Champions, the lion's share of that credit belongs to Tyson, for consolidating the title to begin with. (For his part, Holyfield consolidated the Cruiserweight Title, and established his 15 round pedigree against Qawi.)

Holmes recorded victories over the following world title claimants:

Norton
Ocasio (Eventual WBA Cruiserweight Champion)
Weaver (2X)
Ali
Berbick (By shutout)
Leon Spinks
Witherspoon
Smith (2X)
Mercer (WBO Heavyweight Champion and Olympic Gold medalist)

Holmes defeated five future champions (Ocasio, Weaver, Berbick, Witherspoon and Smith).

Holmes eliminated the following from the unbeaten ranks:

Ocasio
Leroy Jones
Snipes
Cooney
Witherspoon
Frank
Marvis Frazier
Bey
Williams
Mercer

(Lewis defeated four unbeatens.)

Holmes won matches over a period of nearly thirty years, and when in his forties, was far more impressive against a peak McCall and Mercer than a prime Lennox was, also much more impressive against a young Ocasio than the young Lewis was against an aged Ocasio. Due to circumstances beyond Lewis's control, Holmes also has the 15 round pedigree Lennox never had the chance to establish for himself.

Finally, there's a saying that, "As goes the heavyweights, so goes boxing." The sport was never bigger than it was in the early 1980s, and Holmes was the HW Champion in Ali's wake during those heady halcyon days in its history. Lewis was one of those who presided over boxing's decline and fall as a mainstream attraction.

Didn't he fight Cobb about a year and a half after Dokes?

[ChrisPontius]

Originally Posted by Sonny's jab

That's highly debatable.

1)
Holyfield is the greater fighter.
Norton usually ranks anywhere between top30 and top15.
Holyfield ranks between top15 and top7.

2)
Holyfield had more left as a fighter.
He went on to have a good showing against Lewis in the rematch and after that beat two high ranked contenders (Rahman & Ruiz) and may beat another one in the future, although i highly doubt that.

Norton, after the Holmes fight, got KO'd in one round by Shavers, drew with Ledoux, barely beat Cobb and then got brutally KO'd in one round again, by Cooney.


So Holyfield is greater all-round AND had more left in the tank.
I don't see how it's debatable which was the better win. Not that a resume should defined by the best win, but still.

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by Iron Duke

Lewis:
Mercer
Tyson
Holyfield
Ruddock
Weaver
Biggs
Tucker
Bruno
McCall
Tua
Morrison
Golota
Klitschko

Holmes:
Ali
Norton
Shavers
Cooney
Berbick
Witherspoon
Smith



I think Lewis takes it in terms of competition.

Lets see now, Larry beat Weaver twice, the peak Weaver, and when they were both past it, a 42 year old Larry beat a prime Mercer very convincingly. Larry gave McCall all he could handle back in 95, when Holmes was 13 years past it, and McCall was in his prime. And why would you count a washed up Tyson on Lewis's record? If you do, then you would have to count Holmes on Tyson's record. Larry fought 5 of the guys on Lewis's resume, and gave most of them a handful, and beat 1 of them, when he was way past it. Lewis beat a lot of those guys when they were washed up or way past it, like Tyson and Holyfield. Lewis beat shells of those fighters.

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius

Lewis has an all-round better resume and his best win (dominated a 36 year old Holyfield) is better than Holmes' best win (close win over an aging Norton).

If there was any doubt, the fact that Lewis actually took on dangerous fights and unified whereas Holmes didn't do so from 1982 should make the difference.

The Norton of the Holmes fight beats the Holyfield that fought Lewis 7 times out of 10. Also, if you really want to get into the thing post 82 title reign from Holmes, be my guest.

[ChrisPontius]

Originally Posted by Duodenum

Finally, there's a saying that, "As goes the heavyweights, so goes boxing." The sport was never bigger than it was in the early 1980s, and Holmes was the HW Champion in Ali's wake during those heady halcyon days in its history. Lewis was one of those who presided over boxing's decline and fall as a mainstream attraction.

If this was the first time i got in contact with boxing, you'd actually make me believe that the late 70's and early 80's were a great period in heavyweight boxing. Get real, it was a very weak period with titles changing hands all the time, fighters coming in out of shape all the time, the challegers being ducked by the champion, every single close fight being ducked by the champion, the champion dropping his title to avoid a challenger and being given an (at that time) meaningless belt instead, etc.


Nice numerical ways you apply to dodge comparisons between actually beaten competition. Yeah, impressive that Holmes took away the undefeatedness of a a handful of 10 round pups. Wow, and nice that he had 20 consecutive title defenses...... against mostly undeserving challengers while ducking the dangerous fights (rematches & deserving challengers).

[ChrisPontius]

Originally Posted by Bill1234

The Norton of the Holmes fight beats the Holyfield that fought Lewis 7 times out of 10.

When did that happen? I must have missed those fights.

[Duodenum]

Originally Posted by Titan1

Didn't he fight Cobb about a year and a half after Dokes?

Yes. Cobb had to generate a winning streak before getting his shot. Dokes was about to have his first controversial tiff with Weaver when Holmes shut Randy out. Until the Weaver rematch, Cobb and Ocasio had given Dokes his toughest matches. (Ocasio deserved the decision in their first match, but he wasn't going to get it over a kid who might as well have been Dong King's son at the time.)

[Duodenum]

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius

If this was the first time i got in contact with boxing, you'd actually make me believe that the late 70's and early 80's were a great period in heavyweight boxing. Get real, it was a very weak period with titles changing hands all the time, fighters coming in out of shape all the time, the challegers being ducked by the champion, every single close fight being ducked by the champion, the champion dropping his title to avoid a challenger and being given an (at that time) meaningless belt instead, etc.


Nice numerical ways you apply to dodge comparisons between actually beaten competition. Yeah, impressive that Holmes took away the undefeatedness of a a handful of 10 round pups. Wow, and nice that he had 20 consecutive title defenses...... against mostly undeserving challengers while ducking the dangerous fights (rematches & deserving challengers).

If it wasn't for your welcome commentaries on my posts, I might feel invisibly insignificant. Thanks for the attention. (Please be kind enough to continue throwing peanuts my way!)

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius

If this was the first time i got in contact with boxing, you'd actually make me believe that the late 70's and early 80's were a great period in heavyweight boxing. Get real, it was a very weak period with titles changing hands all the time, fighters coming in out of shape all the time, the challegers being ducked by the champion, every single close fight being ducked by the champion, the champion dropping his title to avoid a challenger and being given an (at that time) meaningless belt instead, etc.


Nice numerical ways you apply to dodge comparisons between actually beaten competition. Yeah, impressive that Holmes took away the undefeatedness of a a handful of 10 round pups. Wow, and nice that he had 20 consecutive title defenses...... against mostly undeserving challengers while ducking the dangerous fights (rematches & deserving challengers).

Yeah,

The mid 90's through 2003, was certainly the golden age of the division with John Ruiz, Chris Byrd, James Toney, an aging Holyfield, a shot Tyson, Larry Donald, Hasim Rahman, Corrie Sanders and countless others. What's even better Chris, is that Lewis wasn't even capable of beating the best fighters of this period, losing to Mccall and Rahman, while drawing with a shot Holyfield, and getting a way with a close decision against a faded Mercer.

While the late 70's and early 80's was definately a weak period in the division's history, it was nothing like the 10 year time frame between 1994 and 2004. At one point, you had past prime middleweights like Roy Jones and James Toney winning belts for Christ's sake!!! Is this what you call a division worth unifying??? In Holmes day, the concept of having 3 titles was relatively new, and what's more, the idea of having one man holding them all was even more unusual. Holmes held the IBF title from 1983 to 1985. During that period, you had the WBC and WBA belts change hands between 6 men in just over two years. None of them could hold onto a title long enough to build momentum for a unification. Also, while Shavers, Cooney, Norton, Frank, Witherspoon, Boncrusher, and some of Holmes other challengers may not have been stellar per say, they were at least at a reasonable age, and had respectable records. Once again, Holmes also DEFEATED all of his oppnents when in his prime. Lewis couldn't even beat every man on his top list...

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius

the champion dropping his title to avoid a challenger and being given an (at that time) meaningless belt instead, etc.

I know your talking about the Page thing. I will type what is in Larry's book, and what is the truth. (Against the Odds by Larry Holmes, copyright 1998 by Larry Holmes with Phil Berger------------Page 222-224)

(Starting at the end of the 1st full paragraph on pg 222)

I began thinking of retirement.
But that changed abruptly when a pair of promoters, Murad Muhammmad and Bob Andreoli, offered me $5 million for a two fight deal --Scott Frank and Marvis Frazier. That was, I thought, practically like a white collar crime. Easy money. Found money. I couldn't imagine either Frank, a White kid from New Jersey, or Frazier, the son of Smokin' Joe, lasting more than a few rounds with me.
The hitch here was convincing King to butt out so I could sock away these easy paydays without his getting a taste. What's more, I had promised King that I would fight another heavyweight of his, Greg Page.(its not really bolded or anything) Both Page and King were concerned that at my age, who knows--maybe the worst would happen and either Frank or Frazier would knock me off.
I was able to convince Page that the wait was worth it...and don't worry, neither Frank or Frazier would lay a glove on me. Besides, I told him, he wasn;t going to make better money fighting any other heavyweight. Page went along with it.
But King...well, he was his usual greedhead self, reluctant to cut a fighter of his--even one who, like me, had made him millions of dollars--a little slack. That really angered me. And when I get angry, I either laugh or cry. I couldn't hold the tears back when King and I began arguing and cursing one another. Finally, I looked him in the eye and told him that if he tried to stop these fights, that I would retire--and that he would have a cut of a fight that would never happen. He looked at me and saw I meant what I said...and backed off.
Scott Frank was a wild swinger who had no style whatsoever. I stopped him in 5 roundsin September 83' in Atlantic City.
A week before the Frazier fight, the WBC held its annual convention in Vegas, where Holmes-Frazier was to take place. Earlier, Sig Rogich, the WBC's VP, told me his championship commitee would strip me of my title if I fought Frazier instead of taking my mandatory bout against Page. Rogich had once been the chairman of the Neveda boxing commision and was used to reamrodding his decisions through. Seemed to me he was still bugged about not being able to stop from fighting the Frenchman, Rodriguez. And who knows? Maybe he was acting on the urging of Donald King. King and the WBC--hell, they were tighter than canned sardines.
Anyway, I had hardly set my bags down in Vegas when here comes the little snor, Sulaiman, to give me a lecture on ingratitude. All that the WBC had done for me...why wasn't I greatful?
I told him "Jose, what about all I did for the WBC? What about my staying in it and being its champion all these years? And what about the damn kickbacks I paid?"
He said, real deadpan--as only Jose could--"Kickbacks? Whats a kickback?"
It was an oscarwinning performance.
At the convention, the WBC boys were still threatening to strip my title if I went ahead and fought Frazier. I had brought a young Vegas attorney, Mark Risman, with me to speak on my behalf. The WBC boys treated him like dirt. Next day, I showed up with Oscar Goodman, one o fthe most important lawyers in Vegas, a man who defended some of the biggest moneyme out there. The tone was completely different. It was, "Yes Nr. Goodman. Of course Mr. Goodman."
Toward the end of the convention, Rogich was still making noise about the mandatory defense against Page, and eventually proposing that the matter be put to arbitration. Maybe I didn't go to school that much, but I'm not stupid. I wasn't going to let them do that. There was no arbitrationg Larry Holmes's independence. On the last day of the convention, I stepped to the microphone and told them how disapointed I was with the orginization, how after all my years of loyalty, they weren't giving me any consideration. I guess they thought I wasn't. I called their bluff. I said, "You don't have to strip me of my title. I don't want to be your champion anymore. I resign."
Well, that shook them big. You could hear gasps in the room, and some of the WBC members shouting no, no, I wasn't allowd to resign. Not allowd? Hell, didn't they hear? I just did it. Rogich said his comittee "would take it underadvisement." Fine, you do that, Sig, but I'm out of hear. (ended on the 3rd-last paragraph on page 224)

[My dinner with Conteh]

That's from Larry's point of view. He's hardly going to say "I am the mallard, I ducked Super Greg" is he? The man had no class at the best of times.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by My dinner with Conteh

That's from Larry's point of view. He's hardly going to say "I am the mallard, I ducked Super Greg" is he? The man had no class at the best of times.

Super Greg, was a super putz. The man wasn't ducked by anybody. Get your head out of your ass dinner.