In 1980 heavyweight champion Larry Holmes defended his title four times within the same calendar year. Among those four challengers was Minnesota resident and fringe contender Scott Ledoux. Prior to this point, Ledoux had more or less been a career journeyman for most of his time in the pros. But in 1979, Scott fought very recent former champion Ken Norton and decked him twice to a draw. In his next bout he gave a game effort to Top contender Mike Hercules Weaver who months later became the WBA champion. And finally, in his last outing leading up to the Holmes fight, Ledoux defeated undefeated ranked contender Marty Monroe. Obviously there were more qualified challengers in the division, but perhaps he had some claim to a shot. If this were a discussion about a title shot given in 1940 rather than 1980, then drawing with a recent former champion, giving a good effort against a current titlist and beating a top 10 contender might have gotten some praise.
He was more deserving challenger than Lucien Rodriguez, Scott Frank, even Reynaldo Snipes (who clearly lost to Coetzee but got a gift). Maybe I've forgot a few more.
I think "The Fighting Frenchman" gave a reasonable account of himself on the night he fought a come-backing George Foreman. I have watched that fight a few times over the years, and he didn't seem scared of George. He came to fight, that's for sure............
Scott didn't really deserve the shot. Holmes was just defending against easy opponents for money's sake, and the WBC let him get away with it. One could argue that LeDoux deserved a stoppage over Norton....Ken was out on his feet, held up by the ropes. Weaver dominated LeDoux...it wasn't pretty. I figured Scott was done then. But then he beat Monroe, who himself didn't have much of a resume. He'd just knocked out Lynn Ball, who'd just knocked out an ancient Ron Lyle. Anyway, no one expected Holmes-LeDoux to be a contest and it wasn't. I will tip my hat to LeDoux though....the guy found himself on TV a lot despite being well short on talent.
I accept ledoux as a voluntary defense tuneup. He was tough and game. klitschko has defended against a few like him. Every champion has had a few soft defenses in between taking on there number 1.
Ledoux was simply a backwood's country Minnysota wannabe. Tough guy with limited skills. "Holmes poked me in the eye!" Yeah, you were going to get your **** handed to you either way. For those who saw that fight on TV, do you remember Chris Shenkle interrupting the commentary after the fight (somewhat awkwardly) after Ledoux's seconds pushed and abused him during his post-fight ****ysis? He was livid that the Ledoux camp pushed and abused him and rightfully so. **** on Scott. Yet another wannabe with limited skills that thinks he would have any remote shot at a title. Yeah, maybe in a barroom with other 'crack-****s' atsch
I did watch the fight beginning to end, but don't remember that bit (different TV channel camera's). What was that lot all about?
Yeah but Homes fought these guys in between the bigger names he fought in the year. Klitschko fought these type of guys like they were the bigger names and didn't fight 4 of them a year like Holmes , Ali , Louis etc
Homes went to Minnysota for the fight. They went on the road to fight weak bodies in between fights to reach a broader audience. Nothing wrong with that.
The LeDoux fight was hot on the heels of defences against Leroy Jones and Lorenzo Zanon. Holmes didn't exactly go out of his way to look for tough opponents. When the WBC finally insisted he fight their #1 ranked Greg Page (his preferred opponents were Scott Frank and Marvis Frazier - the latter he couldn't even get sanctioned as a title fight), he ditched the belt and took up with the IBF, which had conveniently just been created.
Yes, this action right her prevents Holmes from being placed in my top 3 heavyweights of all time list. My biggest pet peeve is a champion ducking his best or mandatory opposition. It gets bad when you consider page had the youth speed athleticism right hand to give a 33 year old Holmes quite a bit of problems
I agree with your sentiments about LeDoux's lack of skill, but not your assessment of "backwater" people or LeDoux's possible choice of drugs.