There's a pretty nifty site to answer your question. www.boxrec.com Just go to the heavyweight section and click on either of the top two names to get your answer.
Stop comparing Holmes to the Klitschkos, Holmes beat guys like Renaldo Snipes, Tex Cobb, and arthritic Muhammed Ali. Sure he lost to a blown up LHW with gammy knees, twice, but hey, come on.
He beat Norton when he was considered the best heavyweight in the world. He might never have beaten 1/2 whilst ranked 1/2 but he was seen by nigh everyone as the top hw from the Norton fight until maybe the spoon fight. Also he got robbed in the Spinks rematch.
:huhhow the hell was norton considering the best heavyweight in the world and like a year later when cooney got him he was a senior on a golf cart??
Him and young were both coming off robberies against Ali. The winner of that fight was clearly the top man in the division. He wasn't a senior, he got bombed out and caught cold. It's heavyweight boxing, it happens. When you fight a guy like shavers or Cooney you gotta accept that one punch can end your night. You seen price v Thompson right? That's all it takes one shot in the perfect place, or one shot you don't see coming.
Spinks is an ATG shithead, not a semi golfer or a fighter with 10+++++ losses who have been a journeyman all his career
I'm not gonna get into the argument here but to say that Ali got a gift against someone and therefore he would get KTFO or Klitschko got beat by golfer and therefore he would be KTFO is just shalow. Every fight is different. Styles are different. Sometimes you are 100%, other times less. Sometimes you get lucky other times your opponent gets lucky. When you fight 50+ fights its nearly imposible to beat eery style and have perfect record.
Norton was not considered the best HW in the world, he was considered old and shot, and Holmes barely scraped out a SD against him and I thought Norton won the fight. Norton was bombed out in 1 by Shavers and Cooney not long after, he fought to a draw with Scott LeDoux FFS The fact that Holmes lost twice to LHW that Tyson obliterated in under a minute says a lot.
Oh look, it's Silencer/Gained/Joe McKKKenzie again. Still 'contributing' to that Godawful boxing blog?
This might be the most ******ed thing I've ever read on the general forum. Norton was the champ and Holmes was the challenger. Norton had been robbed against Ali and then went on to outpoint young who had also given Ali a very close fight (my call of robbery before was incorrect I had Ali 8-7). If Norton wasn't the number 1 then who was? I'm not giving a **** about his performances after, hw boxing can end with one good shot. Plus none of that changes the circumstances going into the fight.
A record of 40-1 doesn't mean someone is in their prime atsch. Experienced, sure. But he was not "prime" by any correct definition. When JCC Jr. had 40 fights, was/is he considered prime?
Holmes fought like a true champion and gave the sport a classic fight against Norton. As an old man he beat undefeated Mercer who went on to almost beat Lewis 5 years later. Holmes lost to MaCall by only a point right after him knocking Lewis out and 7 years after his defeat to Tyson.
Bull****, that post is straight from that ****ing awful, shitty, giant turd of a boxing blog, then you link straight to two threads you just happen to have posted in previously. Klitards atsch
Norton was a belt holder but he never won the belt in the ring, the WBC stripped Leon Spinks for giving Ali the rematch instead of fighting Norton. Norton was 35-36 at the time and was considered well past his best, everyone thought Holmes would wipe the floor with him.