Best five wins thread. Lineal / Ring Magazine heavyweight champions.

Holmes had elite depth, but like Johnson he lacks elite top 5. He's still my third greatest HW, but there are better top 5s here.

 

Agree w this.

 

Fair points,

although who knows if Holmes beats Foreman in 1977. The two not fighting leaves a hole in both resumes regardless of which one, if either, is at fault.

 

I managed to watch the Holmes-Witherspoon fight twice, first with the sound off and then with it on so I could hear what Angelo Dundee had to say as the analyst.

I had Witherspoon winning by one point. I gave him the 9th round by one point, but I think it would be fair to make that a two point round which would have put Witherspoon up by two points at the end.

Overall, it was a great fight with a lot of skill shown by both men. I enjoyed that there was actual boxing, rather than the soporific jab and grab style of Ernie Terrell, whom I watched a couple of times recently. There were few clinches and a lot of action.

What stood out to me was how effective Witherspoon's right hand crossed in front of the face was against Holmes' jabs. It looked to me like he was picking off most of them. Dundee emphasized that point. Witherspoon also was effective going to the body. Holmes showed a lot of grit and a champion's heart, but I thought he fell a bit short.

There was a post that Witherspoon didn't win a round until the 9th. That obviously wasn't the way Dundee and Schenkel saw it. Muhammad Ali was briefly interviewed after the fourth round. He slurred his words a bit, but this is what I understood him to say: "Tim is blocking Holmes best punch--the left jab. Way it looks to me, Holmes will have to knock him out or Tim will win by a decision."

"Controversial" is a judgment call. It was a close fight. I wouldn't call it a robbery, but I had Witherspoon edging it. Dundee used the word controversial after the decision was announced. Both he and Schenkel had Witherspoon winning. Witherspoon hurt Holmes worse in the 9th than Holmes ever hurt Witherspoon. Witherspoon ended the fight largely unmarked, a tribute to his defense, while Holmes was badly swollen around both eyes. Holmes carried his hands lower which made him more vulnerable to jabs, as Dundee pointed out once.

I stand by that Holmes should have given Witherspoon a rematch.

 

Larry Holmes

1-----Ken Norton
2-----Tim Witherspoon
3-----Mike Weaver
4-----Trevor Berbick
5-----Gerry Cooney

not making the cut. Ali--this was a critical win for Holmes, as it gave him his claim to be lineal champion. But Ali was not only old but sick.
Shavers--I went with Cooney because he was undefeated, although how good he really was is a bit up in the air for me.

Why Weaver and Berbick? Their upsets of other contenders after losing to Holmes really enhanced Holmes' stature.

 

I just rewatched Holmes Witherspoon this time for the first time with sound off - I scored it 8-4 Holmes.

 

I see a good case for Weaver.

He was #1 contender for a while.

 

I thought Holmes put on a master class. His jab worked overtime, he turned Witherspoon when he wanted and clinched when he charged in. Was a good if just past prime performance from Larry. Witherspoon clearly got frustrated at times too. Holmes too active, too good too mobile. But for just 15 fights Witherspoon put in a damn good fight. Had some good body shots and the big round 9.

 

Scoring is subjective and this fight is very revealing on how different folks score fights differently.

I think the disagreement centers on how effective Holmes' jabs were. Was Holmes putting on a master class with his jab? I saw the jabs often picked off by a high guard. It is I guess a philosophical question of whether jabs into a guard which don't penetrate the guard should be counted as scoring. Many do score such jabs. In fairness, if one fighter is jabbing and the other blocking the jabs, the jabber is forcing the other man to be defensive. But is his offense at all effective? This fight ended with Holmes having severe swelling around both eyes. Witherspoon appeared almost unmarked. Seems odd that the guy with the badly puffed features was the teacher in a master class with the almost unmarked guy the student.

 

Three things: Witherspoon was younger, Holmes wasn’t a huge puncher and guys tend to mark up differently. Fighters that are marked up, sometimes tells the story and other times does not, case in point Ward was marked up way more than Kovalev in their first fight - and I agreed like most people that Kovalev had won that fight, then take a fight like Bowe Golota 2-
Bowe’s face was not nearly as bad as Golota’s was in the post fight and yet Golota really put a beat down on him. So it doesn’t always tell the story.
Yes Witherspoon picked off many of Holmes jabs but his own Jab was slipped repeatedly by Holmes, who clinched, pivoted and turned Witherspoon at will. I just don’t see the controversy with this fight. But scoring is subjective as you said. Holmes’ jab was the best in the business even if it didn’t land it kept you occupied.

 

Michael Spinks is going to be interesting!

 

Just to clarify, Spinks did not only have four fights at heavyweight, as many people believe.

A few of his fights during his tenure at light heavyweight, were above the light heavyweight limit.

Wouldn't it be fairer to round out his top five from those, rather than select a quality light heavyweight opponent, when that option was denied to other fighters?