Who is Greater between Holmes or Marciano?

Bob Baker was the most highly touted prospect coming up since Joe Louis according to Mcgrains Ring Magazine article. He was undefeated, in his prime in 1951-1952...A fight with him and Marciano should have come off BEFORE Marciano won the title.

After Henry defeated the undefeated Baker by knockout in 1951, he sent out a challenge to Marciano's camp. However, Marciano just scored a terrific win over Joe Louis and Rex Layne establishing himself # 2 contender. Henry issued Marciano a challenge, with the winner to face Walcott for the crown. Al Weil, weary of Clarence Henry, chose a safe option to preserve Marciano's status as top contender by picking on poor old hapless out of shape Lee Savold.

A fight between Marciano vs Henry in 1952 would have been a huge fight in the heavyweight division with the 2 hottest, young prime heavyweight contenders fighting for the right to challenge Walcott.

 

Holmes isn't off the hook either. He never fought Pinklon Thomas, Michael Dokes, Gerrie Coetzee, Greg Page(WBC MANDATORY)....NO excuses. Definitely tarnishes his reputation a bit.

 

Holmes, for me, based on longevity and ability.

Its rather close, though. I think ranking either guy in the 3-5 slot is appropriate. I just think Larry has the edge if you factor what you were seeing on screen in at all.

 

Good post. I have him at #3 too, Holmes varies from 4-6 on my list usually

 

Where do you have Holmes among the great HWs purely in terms of skill? Compared to Ali and Holyfield for example?

 

Larry Holmes is one of the best guys to ever do this.

He could box, he could brawl, inside and outside. He knew all the tricks, he could foul, he was smart...


He ranks right up there near Ali in terms of brains, mental fortitude, and ring awareness.

He's easily, at his best, a more talented fighter than Holyfield, though, Evander was also a tremendous technician himself, by and large.

Difficult comparison there, stylistic difference.

I'll still say, Holmes is a top three heavyweight in terms of actual ability.

 

Holmes showed some true smartness and skill when frustrating Holy in their fight. Impressive perfomance.

 

I guess it turns on whether you like quality or quantity in a resume.

 

From Norton to Michael Spinks I, Larry had that target on his back, yet prevailed 19 times straight over an eight year interval. I can't see Rocky at age 42 taking Mercer to the woodshed, and he was the same age for Murray Woroner's staged superfight with Ali that Holmes was in real life when Larry came close to dethroning a McCall fresh off of Oliver's knockout of Lennox.

Marciano had as pithy a reign as any HW Champion ever had, but Larry only sustained two conclusive defeats over a 30 year span [Holyfield and Tyson]. Yes, there were alternative champions he did not face during his reign, but they either failed to defend their titles at his pace, or were unable to retain their claims.

 

Holmes sucked, struggled to beat supbar boxers, struggled through every fight. Marciano had tough fights and then good rematches against GREAT fighters. Holmes near lost to a near dozen fighters who are never considered top 10 like spinks, tyson, isaac, shavers, snipes, witherspoon, williams, norton and ducked rematching all but 2, one of whom he lost to twice. Marciano would have beaten Holmes to a pulp he has a jab like iran barkley and it can be turned into a liability real quick against an opponent above the calibre of carl williams who out jabbed larry anyways. Larry would have probably been KOed in 8 then 2.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

It does, but overall, and it pains me to say it, I agree with Tommo on this one. I voted for Holmes because I think he is very good all round. He had heart, took a great shot, had punch variety and decent power. He had that great jab,too.

On the controversial decisions; I thought Holmes clearly beat Witherspoon and Williams so for me there was no controvery. And Rocky had a couple of close squeaks, too. I think the quality is a fair point, but guys like Cooney, Shavers and Weaver were dangerous punchers, so Larry beat pretty decent opposition.

I notice it's a very close poll,though!

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Well while marciano might have faced a higher aggregate contender, Holmes faced many, many more ranked boxers (and won). And to quote somebody, 'quantity has a quality all it's own'.

Also I love how marciano is a 'runt' and a 'midget' when he's as tall as Tyson and Tua. Taller maybe...

 

Yet lost to a blown up Light Heavy to end his bid for Marcianos streak...