Mike Tyson had a better career than Larry Holmes.

One last time. Ocasio had just beaten one of the top contenders two times in a row. That is a fact. And he was most likely top 5 because of it.

After all your spouting "Tyson KO'd Holmes and that's a fact" as that there where all there was to that fight you're very much about trying to spin your context on a much more straightforward fact. It's transparent and just a waste of time for any kind of discussion. That's all.

 

For sure, unfortunately that was never very likely.

 

Earlier in the thread you were speaking as if you KNEW how many top 5 fighters Tyson and Holmes did meet.
Now you're saying "If Ocasio was top 5".
Was he or wasn't he ?

 

Nitpicking? You said flat out that Tyson beat more opponents ranked top 5 by The Ring and seemingly can't back it up. This is very black and white, did he or didn't he? If he didn't, it's not nitpicking to say that you were wrong.

If the Top 5 ranked opponents Tyson beat were better or not than those that Holmes beat is a different discussion than your simple statement that he beat more of them. If you were wrong, just admit it. It isn't the whole world. Sometimes one is. But trying to change the subject instead is just the mark of a poor poster.

 

No, you made those "factual" snippets a centrepiece of your whole ****ing argument.
An argument that's been in absolute tatters for at least 15 pages now, by the way.
Completed shredded, eviscerated.

 

In 85 Tubbs beat Tim Miller, a guy who was 2-12.

He then fought smith in a wba eliminator. Should be have turned down an eliminator? Of course not. This win gave him a shot at Page and he became a champ for the first time April of 85.

Holmes beat bey in March and then Williams in may. It would have been literally impossible to fight Tubbs between these two. Williams was a prime undefeated fighter and ranked #8 and this is somehow a mark against Holmes?

Holmes had been negotiating with spinks all year and the fight was finalized in September of 85. He was guaranteed $3 million dollars. How much would a fight with Tubbs make?

Holmes lost and needed to rematch spinks and was tied up with that in 86 then he retired. Tubbs lost his very first title defense to Witherspoon, a guy Holmes had previously beaten.
In conclusion:

-There was never a perfect time for that fight to happen in 85.
-Tubbs did not do much to separate himself from the rest of the 80's boxers. He beat a washed up Jimmy Young, then beat smith who just about everyone else has beaten. He fought Page me won but then lost his very next defense to Witherspoon.


Thomas:

You said anytime from 82 to 85 Holmes should have fought Thomas and that Thomas was the cream of the crop.

In 82 Holmes was guaranteed $10 million to fight Cooney. How much would he make fighting Thomas? In 82 the biggest name Thomas beat in his career up to that point was Tillis and that fight was in August. The rest of Thomas' opponents were bums. Holmes fought Cooney in June. Thomas had done nothing to be going around demanding a fight with Holmes in 82. He was ranked #14 in the world.

In 83 he had a draw with coetzee. not a win, a draw. So again, he didn't do much to separate himself from the rest of the division other than beating Tillis. He was ranked #7, which isn't bad but hardly enough to accuse Holmes of avoiding him or that Thomas "deserved" a shot.

In 83 Holmes fought #3 ranked Witherspoon and an undefeated Scott frank. Hardly an easy schedule.

In 84 Thomas beat a bum named Grandham then beat Witherspoon for the wbc title. The wbc title was on the line because Holmes gave up the belt due to a feud with don king. Does it make ANY sense for him to give up a belt in December and then challenge the wbc champion the following year?

85 Holmes was pretty much ready to retire and was looking for some big days so that he could ride into the sunset.

 

I'm sure he's right since his posts stink. LOL

 

I just saw this thread's length (matron) and decided against reading it all before posting. Had I joined at the start, I would have said this.

Tyson's reign had an aura and invincibilty, plus a violent intensity, that Holmes' career never had. Larry never sat as firmly astride the division as Mike did.

But he did it for twice the length of time. It's a bit like being hit by a Pontiac at 100mph or a Mack Truck at 50 (to paraphrase George Chuvalo on the difference between getting hit by Joe Frazier and George Foreman).

With his overwhelming superiority, often proven in devastating fashion, Mike's star burned twice as brightly but for half as long as Larry's (if we disregard both's careers after they had lost the lineal title). It comes down to what you go for - intensity or longevity. Style or substance.

I can't decide. But I think Larry's late flurry in career 2 with the impressive displays against Mercer, Holyfield and McCall edges Mike's wins over Ruddock, Stewart, Bruno, Golota after he had lost the title, if only because Larry was well into his 40s when he was going against those top men. Plus his career 2 didn't have the losses and all of the out of ring (and in ring) nonsense that tarnished Tyson's comeback.

In a nutshell. Career one is 6/5 and pick 'em for me. Career two? I give the nod to Holmes.

 

Thomas was credible for a very brief moment in time tho. As I charted out the timeline, Thomas was only ranked #7 in 1983 and his best win was Tillis. The year before that in 82 he was only ranked #14. He won the belt in 84 because it became vacant after Holmes left the wbc in frustration with King over purses.

Name one time in the history of boxing when a fighter dropped a belt due to promotional/financial disputes and then attempted to win that belt back in under a year?

By 85 Holmes was 36 and looking to cash out. He was offered tons of money to fight spinks, which he lost and then got tied up with a rematch and retired.

The only time when this could have happened is 84 for a very brief window, and as I mentioned Holmes had beef with the WBC so that's a stretch. Before 84, Thomas was ranked very low and had done basically nothing to separate himself from the rest of the division. After 84, Holmes was tied up with spinks and then retired.

 

he fought Bonecrusher in 1984. In 1985 he signed to fight David Bey, Carl Williams and the light heavyweight champ spinks. He effectively had a good year to fight the WBC champion who was better than the 4 men he ACTUALLY fought in that time frame.

 

Williams and bey and spinks were all undefeated boxers. Can you really crucify Holmes for facing a bunch of prime undefeated ranked guys in a row? Spinks in particular, he was offered tons of money to fight.

As for Thomas, as I mentioned he was only ranked #7 before be fought Witherspoon in the WBC eliminator. Holmes had JUST relinquished that belt. So yes, if you want to get technical the fight was potentially there, but with historical context it's a bit strange to expect Holmes to fight for a belt he had just given up due to disputes with the promoter and sanctioning body.