1980 Larry Holmes vs the best version of Deontay Wilder

Weaver & Witherspoon were good in these areas, not elite. They gave Holmes real trouble (arguably Witherspoon beat him), but they never had Holmes on death’s door. Either did Cooney. A great puncher who was a top-notch finisher never tested Holmes’ recuperative powers until Tyson, by which time as we agree, not much can be fairly gleaned. Again I’m not saying Holmes didn’t have strong recoveries in him, but it’s really not very proven in my eyes. Weaver, Witherspoon & Cooney never had him in serious knockout danger, Shavers was exhausted (& had only one type of punch to offer), & Snipes just didn’t have the power (but got halfway toward knocking Holmes out anyway).

The rest of your post I have already made similar points & we agree on. Since someone has since picked Wilder by KO I’m sure you now feel you have bigger fish to fry LOL.

 

I am going with Larry Holmes by Decision win, but I am not dismissing the possibility that Deontay Wilder could put him on the canvas once. If that happened I do believe Larry would get up and go on to win.

 

Are you a new member ? i don't think we've ever discussed boxing before but my first impressions are put forth your argument in a respectable manner which i respect. But i don't agree with a few points which i'd like to address and then i'll move on so we're not going back and forth on such a fickle matter

Witherspoon may not quite have Wilder's right hand power although i don't think he's too far behind, see the Ecklund, Tucker, Gonzalez, stoppages. But he makes up for that slightly less power with better attributes than Wilder in other areas like overall skill set, jab, defence, etc.

Again i would say Weaver's left hook isn't too far behind Wilder's right hand, and Weavers stoppages over Carl Williams, Gerrie Coetzee, John Tate, are more notable opponents than any of Wilder's victims.

Can i may ask when's the last time you watched this fight ? because i watched it again a few months ago. And i think you'll be quite surprised if you refreshed your memory on this fight. Cooney gave Holmes a very tough fight for 10 rounds and certainly tested him, whilst he didn't have Holmes in huge trouble he certainly hit Holmes with his fair share of solid shots, and Holmes took them well which shows Holmes's toughness to take punches off a huge puncher in a grueling fight.

Yeah no worries mate i have no other issues with your post, i get what you're trying to say although i don't agree with it entirely but yeah enjoy the rest of your night.

 

Yes, I’m new.

For now at least I’d agree with Witherspoon, a very good fighter on his day, being better than Wilder. So not much divergence of opinion there. Regarding Cooney, let me clarify - when I say he didn’t test Holmes’ recuperative powers, I’m thinking specifically of someone having Holmes in serious danger of a knockout. It’s often said Holmes had amazing ability to recover when in mortal danger, & that’s where I think there’s some doubt - who had him on que3r street who could hit big & finish big? Cooney gave him some difficulties but was never close to putting him away, & you already know I don’t hold the Shavers & Snipes recoveries in as high a regard as some others do. I just don’t know - if someone like Foreman or Louis or Liston had him in trouble - that I’ve seen enough of Holmes under the pump to say he’d survive.

 

Because IMO he has absolutely nothing in his arsenal of tools but a big punch. That impresses people and can get you a long way, certainly, but not to true historical eliteness. I would have him at the tail end of my top 40.

 

I can't help but notice I'm the only one to vote for Wilder.

I can't also help but notice nobody else is actually talking about Larry Holmes in 1980.

I also can't help but notice nobody is talking about a year where they felt Wilder fought his best.

I don't rate Wilder over Holmes all-time. Not even close.

BUT the original poster posed a very specific question, and guys are droning on about all-time rankings and fights Holmes had in EVERY YEAR BUT 1980.

Boxers actually change from year to year. They improve. They get worse. They have bad years. They have years where nothing goes quite right.

I was a fan in 1980, and Larry Holmes wasn't considered anything special that year. At all. In fact, he was bashed for his choice of opponents. Everyone noticed how he seemed to have gotten worse than he was in 1978 and 1979. His performances were considered tedious.

No one was marveling at Larry's wins in 1980. Fans weren't drawn to Larry by his SPECTACULAR performances that year.

On the contrary, I think his fights with Zanon and Jones were fought in front of about 3,000 people. So he had to go to Minnesota so they could get Scott Ledoux's fans to buy tickets.

It wasn't a great year for Holmes. He had regressed, in the minds of the public.

Actually go back and watch those fights. I'm sure they're easy to find. Holmes-Lorenzo Zanon. (Zanon actually took rounds.) Holmes-Leroy Jones (one fat blob round after round letting Holmes pound away, and Larry still can't put drop him). Holmes-Scott Ledoux (Larry couldn't even hurt Ledoux, until he thumbed him in the eye). And, of course, Holmes-Ali, where nothing was coming back at all, and Holmes just jabbed and jabbed and threw straight rights, and Holmes needed Dundee to stop the fight (because Larry couldn't put him away).

They weren't banner performances.

IF all of you showed someone Wilder's fights from the year he fought his best, and you showed someone Larry Holmes' fights from 1980, do you think they would ALL honestly say Larry Holmes wins ... based on those performances those years?

I really don't think so.

It's easy to say Larry at his best was better than Wilder at his best.

But, in 1980, I'm not seeing it.

Wilder, at his best, was excellent at maintaining range, not getting hit with flush shots, and he was not only fast with that right hand, but it could come out of nowhere in any round. Even the last.

And Wilder wouldn't be giving up 20, 30, 40, 50 pounds to Larry Holmes (like Wilder has had to do for the last dozen years.)

Wilder would actually be the same weight or weigh more than Larry.

Punchng down at a guy his weight.

That didn't happen much in Wilder's career.

And Larry didn't move his head much at all, even on his best days.

Anyway ... continue.

 

While I still have Holmes as a heavy favorite, you're right in particular about one thing. Holmes' defense. Even on his best days it could be quite ordinary. I keep hearing this talk about him being immune to the left, and it's absolute hogwash. Weaver had the most success with his left hook, hurt him several times with it, and arguably decked him with it. Berbick also landed a decent number of lefts.

While Holmes is a huge favorite in my book. Wilder has a puncher's chance (except the Wilder who fought Parker, he looked terrible). I think he would at least floor Holmes, especially given Holmes' tendency to drop his hand after the jab, leaving him perfectly open for Wilder's best weapon.

 

Laughed out loud at this. Cheers mate.

Right on the money. In virtually every H2H matchup on here with ATGs, Holmes is picked to effortlessly outbox and outjab them, when in reality, he didn't do it against the mediocre opposition he actually did fight. For example he struggled greatly with the 19-8 Weaver, Snipes, among others.

He wasn't an Ali, who could effortlessly befuddle, and run circles around his opponents, and he wasn't a Tyson, who could quickly get his opponent out easily. He had to get his hands dirty, fight in the trenches and wear his opponent out.

 

Ken Norton also had no problem landing on Larry in 1978. And 1978 Holmes, to me at least, was Holmes at his best.

Better than Larry was in 1980.

Other than Norton, and Weaver (which, although I hate the term, was the proverbial cherry pick gone wrong, a complete journeyman to that point), Holmes was matched with a very specific type of fighter for most of his reign.

They weren't fast, long, lean guys, with big power, who kept their distance and could strike without warning.

Instead, the guys with power who could box at distance tended to be the WBA champs who Holmes made little to no effort to fight.

Instead, Larry's opponents tended to be guys who stood in front of Larry, gloves up, so he could just work the jab and look for openings with his right. There were a lot of guys like that back then. And he fought most of them.

But Larry never had great head movement. When he did fight guys who could jab, like Norton, Weaver and later Spoon and even Carl Williams, they tended to hit him quite a bit. Spoon and Williams nearly closed his eye.

Larry just tended to go with a "good offense is the best defense" approach. So he was always jabbing. But Larry's head didn't move much.

 

That's a bit of a flawed logic though Holmes didn't have to raise his game vs those types of opponents, that doesn't mean Holmes couldn't raise his game if he fought a more dangerous opponent in 1980.

I'm sure if Holmes was fighting a KO artist like Wilder in 1980 he would train hard and take it very seriously.