Underrated reason why Holmes was the best of his era

I take issue with this claim because no one bitches louder about how they’re perceived than Holmes. He was a great businessman & did put money first, but this feels almost like an admission he knows he never bested a single great opponent (in thirty years!) so now he was only, “ever about money.” His behaviour says otherwise.

 

Don’t shoot the messenger, just repeating the quote. Larry can also be quite full of BS.

 

Had a standing invitation on YouTube for anybody to visit him and hang out with him at his office. Always a friendly guy to meet when traveling through Easton.

Larry and Diane Holmes have been married for 45 YEARS.

He's been a community bedrock for decades, and has never left the area since arriving 70 years ago. Ali moved around (Louisville, Cherry Hill, Chicago, Scottsdale), but the Easton Assassin's kept his roots for seven decades.

 

They've always understood each other, and that's why they can even have friendly sit downs for the camera decades later. (Earnie Shavers also understood Don King.)

 

Norton was a couple of months shy of 35 when Holmes beat him and shopworn. Foreman beat a better version.

If you are saying that Witherspoon was Holmes 3rd best, then who is second?

Yeah, we will agree to disagree. I like quality over quantity, and Foreman's best of Frazier, prime Norton, Moorer, and Lyle is a lot more impressive than Larry's, and I am ending on that. Hell, Bert Cooper would have made a good Holmes defense.

 

You're saying shopworn but Norton was coming off one of the best wins of his career beating Jimmy Young for the title who had recently beaten George Foreman. There's absolutely no evidence to support your argument because Norton's form coming into the Holmes fight says otherwise. I would say the Holmes fight was Norton's last great performance can you name many another performances where Norton looked as good as he did vs Holmes ?

But yeah we'll agree to disagree I'm happy to end it here.

 

The point is that Holmes is overrated. Look at what he did AFTER Holmes. Not even able to beat Scott Ledoux. He was definitely in decline.

 

The point is I don't agree you're stating something as a fact and it isn't.

Norton's form coming into the Holmes fight was very good alot of fans thought he beat Ali in their 3rd fight, stopped undefeated Duane Bobick in 1 round, outpointed Jimmy Young for the title who had convincingly beaten Foreman. So arguably for a short period Norton could've been considered the best Heavyweight in the world after the Young victory because alot felt Norton was 2-1 vs Ali.

So Norton beat the version of Jimmy Young who beat George Foreman but that makes Holmes overrated and not Foreman ? Yet by your logic a "shopworn" Norton out pointed Young so wouldn't that make Foreman’s loss to Young worse then going by your logic ?

 

Lennox Lewis is often ranked #3 at heavyweight. A old Holmes performed better against Mercer & McCall than Lewis did.

 

One issue to point out...Larry lived in a small town, Easton PA. I'm sure he partied like anyone else but he stayed and invested in that town. Stayed married to one wife if in not mistaken. A bit like Crawford who also lives in a small town and stayed a family man.

 

Everything said on her is definitionally and opinion. If I am stating things as fact, then you are doing the same.

Norton was about 35 and showed a demonstrable decline after then Holmes fight. If you want to believe he was prime, go right ahead. The version Foreman beat was better--stated as fact.

 

The key word here is "after" you're stating your evidence as Norton was shopworn based on "after" the Holmes fight and there lies the problem. I think most fans consider the Holmes fight as Norton's last great performance and then there was a steady decline after that. My evidence of Norton not being shopworn up to the Holmes fight is based on his previous performances leading up to the Holmes fight aswell as his actual performance in the Holmes fight which i think is the stronger argument.

I never said Norton was at his absolute peak vs Holmes i said he was in good form which is a difference, and there's nothing to believe he wasn't based on prior performances and his performance in the Holmes fight as i said.

Norton was arguably considered the best Heavyweight in the world after the Young win as the majority felt he beat Ali in their 3rd fight.

 

Regarding Holmes' and Foreman's wins against Norton.

Norton was at his prime against Foreman. He'd beaten everyone he faced, avenged his KO loss, and put on a career best performance imo in that second bout against Ali, in a razor thin loss. His confidence was at an all time high imo which manifested in his performance against Foreman. He didn't freeze up like he did against the later punchers he met Shavers, and Cooney. He actually manifested an actual gameplan, which was going very well until the tail end of the first round, to the point where Foreman and his team were slightly concerned and considered adjustments in the second round.

After the Foreman bout his confidence was never quite the same again, particularly against punchers. I don't think he was quite the same fighter after this loss. Yes he performed better against Ali in that third bout, but I think this moreso has to do with Ali's decline than any improvement on the part of Norton. The Thrilla took a lot out of Ali, as did that farce with Inoki (Ali's legs were never the same). Honestly watching the bout, Norton if anything had regressed since their second fight. Norton still looked good, don't get me wrong, but he was that much slower and older in that third bout imo. It just wasn't as noticeable because Ali had regressed even moreso.

Norton put on an excellent performance against Holmes, perhaps his last great one. But it's clear as day, he'd slowed down compared to that third bout with Ali, let alone his second one.

You can argue (and have a very valid argument) that Holmes has a much wider and diverse resume than Foreman but as for their performances against Norton, Foreman recorded a better result (TKO2 VS SD15) against a better version of Norton than Holmes did. Their's no getting around that.

 

Swag I think this post is fair but I'm not saying Holmes fought a better version of Norton or did better vs Norton as Foreman did.

I just disagree Norton was shopworn vs Holmes and there's nothing to suggest he was based on prior performances or his performance in the Holmes fight.

I think most fans would say Norton's performance vs Holmes was his last great one and that there was a steady decline after that. And I think that's fair to say and that's not me just saying that to make Holmes look better I think that's quite a popular opinion to be quite honest.

 

Swings & roundabouts, though. What would prime Lewis do with an ageing Norton? Poleaxe him, that’s what.