Biggest "forums darlings"

Do you know how many he missed?

 

1. The most glaring one was Pinklon Thomas.
2. He did sign to fight Coetzee at one point but the funding fell apart.

ChatGPT:
1. Gerrie Coetzee (WBA champion, 1983–84)

• After Coetzee knocked out Michael Dokes in September 1983 to win the WBA title, there was heavy talk of a unification fight with Holmes. Holmes initially expressed interest, but money and television disputes stalled it. Instead, Holmes vacated the WBC belt in late 1983 after disputes with Don King and accepted the newly created IBF title.
  

2. Michael Dokes (WBA champion, 1982–83)

• Dokes and Holmes were both Don King fighters for a time, and King floated the idea of a unification bout. Holmes showed interest, but again promoter splits and TV conflicts got in the way.
  

3. John Tate (WBA champion, 1979–80)

• When Tate upset Gerrie Coetzee in 1979, there was some interest in matching the young champion with Holmes, who had just beaten Earnie Shavers. A unification was discussed but Tate lost to Mike Weaver in 1980 before it could be made.
  

4. Mike Weaver (WBA champion, 1980–82)

• Weaver’s upset of Tate and successful defenses made him a viable unification opponent. Holmes expressed interest, but politics (King not controlling Weaver) and money demands kept them apart.
  

5. Pinklon Thomas (WBC champion, 1984–86)

• By the time Thomas had the WBC strap (after Holmes moved to the IBF), a unification bout was floated, but Holmes was nearing the end of his prime and had moved on to different promotional alliances.
  

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_68b35407eec081919d31a3ccc3f7a3c4

 

Fair enough. It also seems that it's also implied some of the fights realistically fell through or couldn't happen for reasons not to do with Holmes alone.

 

Yeah, he ducked Thomas, tried for Coetzee, and was minimally enthusiastic about the others. Either way, Wlad gets credit for unifying and Holmes doesn't. It's not exactly a Harry Wills situation.

 

I agree Wlad had the better reign but also worse losses at the same time.

 

If we’re starting before title eliminators, we might as well go back to Wlad winning Gold and Holmes getting his ass kicked by Nick Wells.

 

No need Greg. Unlike mine, your joke was actually funny….

 

If that's your criteria then sure but I don't lump in amateurs with the pro's even though I think amateur achievements are a nice scalp.

 

The fight with Coetzee was signed, but fell through due to the lack of funding.

 

LOL@ you trying to compare and lump in Holmes losing an amateur bout to a guy getting knocked out in his 25th, 42nd and 45th pro fights.

 

I'm sure you praise Jimmy Young even though he lost like 40% of his fights.

What's interesting about Wlad is he had the second longest reign in history as heavyweight champion after it looked like his career had finished.

 

Why did you bring down the quality...?

 

Duran was a great, great fighter. The stuff of legends. I rate him very highly and enjoy his matches.

But he often gets overrated and has a trillion excuses made for him (more than almost any ATG).

Two things can be true at the same time.

 

What he's doing is no different from Tyson fans claiming any loss after the Rooney split doesn't count as it was after his "prime". So conveniently, Wladmir's biggest losses aren't that important because it was before his long reign.

Also funny he's criticizing Holmes for not unifying when Wladmir failed to unify with his brother (who was either the #1 or #2 boxer of that era) and failed to become undisputed even once despite being active and healthy for over a decade.