Ratings done mid 1989 - 1. Larry Holmes 2. Mike Tyson 3. Michael Dokes 4. Mike Weaver 5. Pinklon Thomas 6. Tim Witherspoon 7. Greg Page 8. Gerrie Coetzee 9. Trevor Berbick 10. Michael Spinks 11. Tony Tubbs 12. Carl Williams
Personally Tyson would undoubtedly be above Holmes for me with the stipulations. Holmes wins over Shavers x 2, Norton and Weaver all fall before the 80's. His two fights with Spinks and the head to head loss to Tyson all fall within the time frame. By comparison Tyson has zero losses and his entire devastating unbeaten streak in there (excepting Williams who was in 89 but after the month the list was done). If he'd actually retired at this point god only knows how high he would be rated. Should be some good debate generated from this list. Most were so inconsistent there's plenty of room for argument.
Dokes too high No signature win other than the premature stoppage of Weaver. It appeared he was lucky to get a draw in the rematch. Thomas and Witherspoon a bit too low.
I agree Holmes best wins were in the 70s I think sheer number of defenses in the 80s makes him look like the number one choice on paper. He did avoid a lot of top comp. in the 80s. And Tyson unified all 3 belts, something Holmes never did.
For what reason Weaver on 4 ?? Had to go two against du Ploy, Dokes beat him, Thomas beat him, as well as Smith and a novice 86-Ruddock.
My first thought was Tyson over Holmes for the reasons already stated. Looking at this list shaking my head. These guys had so much talent. They were so inconsistent. I know there were belts floating around but the only guys who were champions during this decade were Holmes, Spinks and Tyson. I like Thomas at #3. Witherspoon at #4. Spinks#5. After that it's very confusing but I get the strong sense that The TRUTH is being shortchanged somewhat. Maybe because when he was on he was impossible to outbox. I also recall the day he stopped a white hot Bert Cooper on network TV. (At the time) it was significant.
Dokes at 3 is absurd. For beating Mike Weaver? For a spirited loss against Holyfield? Number three is two-time titlist Tim Witherpsoon. Period.
Dokes at #3 is odd. Pinky did beat Spoon and took his "belt" for whatever that is worth. I think Tim became better after that at dealing with a jab. Pinklon Thomas dominated him with the left hand.
Witherspoon did deal with the Holmes jab extremely well prior to the Thomas fight. Holmes had started to slip a bit but Spoon ripped some excellent counters particularly to the body in a fine effort.
Perhaps Holmes took the kid lightly besides being a bit past it. A guy like Thomas wouldnt have that luxery.
The interesting debate is Dokes, Page, Witherspoon, Thomas, Berbick, Coetzee, Page, Smith, Weaver ... you see by the way they all were inconsiderate that all were underachievers to a degree. do we rate them by talent or achievement ? many were very close ... always interesting w this bunch.
I can't understand Trevor Berbick at 8 when he beat Thomas, Tate, and Page. There was one loss between the three of them when he beat them. There's a case for him to be ahead of Page, Dokes, Coetzee, and Weaver.
Love Dokes but #3 is far too high. Might as well place Tony Tucker in there. Maybe KO's reasoning is because he went 1-0-1 against their #4 guy in Mike Weaver. Tyson should be a clear cut #1. Holmes a clear cut #2. After that it gets dicey. I'd probably place Spinks at #3 with both wins over Holmes and the waxing of Cooney. Maybe put Spoon there instead followed by Weaver and then Thomas.
