Would you back Larry Holmes to beat all four of Lennox, Bowe, and the Klits?

Not to sound like Foreman's Hook or anything, but, yeah, how are you going to slag off Larry's competition for the purposes of a comment declaring the Klitschkos would win (AND BY GATDAMN KNOCKOUT) against him?

 

He is a '****!!!

VITLAY beat who??? Euro-BUM Snowski, Saftey-Pin, Lard-Tub, Fat old Golfer Sanders ...... he must be able to KO HOLMES!! patsch VITLAY couldnt even KO SHOT GASSED Briggs who had teh defense of a house-brick.

WALDO beat who??? Wrestler-Eddie, Super-middlewieght Byrd, SHOT Rahman, SHOT Mercer....he must be able to KO HOLMES!! patsch:nut

Homer's wins of Karl Williams, Shavers, PRIME Mercer, B.Smithy, Cooney, NEON Leon And Ken Norton are no-where near teh best wins OAT, BUT they are 1000,000X better than WALDO And VITLAYS tomato-can, BUM resumes added together.

 

Waldo as you call him is alreadly on pace to surpass Holmes in defenses against ranked opposition. It took Larry 12 defenses and 5 years to claim 2 top 5 scalps and 6 top 10, it only took Wlad 8 defenses in 3 years.

And Chambers/Chageav are not a huge step down from Leon Spinks/Cooney.

 

they at least a full GRADE below.

ANd wins over Kenny Norton And Shavers prove more than WALDO will ever prove in his whole god-damn CAREER!!

 

While I rank Holmes' reign higher than Wlad's, the comp level was not exactly leagues better in Holmes' day. Witherspoon was a very good fighter, who would go on to beat some top contenders and win two alpha titles, but only had 15 pro fights at the time he met Holmes. Weaver was nobody, until he rocked Holmes' world. Ali was shot to pieces and Leon Spinks was never much to write home about. David Bey, Alfredo Evangelista and numerous others aren't even worth mentioning. Holmes had some good wins, but they were hardly much better than Chambers, Brock, Chagaev, Peter and some of the others. I guess the real reason why I rate Wlad lower, is because of the devastating losses that he had during his prime.. He was beaten badly by Corrie Sanders at 28 years of age, and never avenged this defeat. He was later defeated by Lamon Brewster, which he avenged, but only years later when Brewster was basically finished.

 

whatever - IMO Holmes has a better resume with Better wins VS better comp.

WALDO resume equal with Tyson IMO.

 

Really?

Gerry Cooney's best wins: 0-0 ranked opposition OUCH.

-A blow out of a Ken Norton who had already spiraled out of the top 10 after a blow out to Shavers and ugly draw against LeDox.

-A blow out of a Ron Lye 2 years removed from the top 10, coming off a blow out to Lynn Ballwho?

-A cut stoppage over a faded Young..2 years out of rankings after losing 4 of his last 7.

Leon Spinks 2-2 ranked opposition

-Beat old Ali, lost to old Ali

-Koed top 10 regular Alfredo Evangelista

-Stopped in one by Coetzee


Ruslan Chageav 2-0 Ranked opposition

-Decisioned top 5 belt holder Valuev.

-Decisioned top 10 regular John Ruiz.

Eddie Chambers 2-1 Ranked opposition

-Decision over top 10 regular Samuel Peter

-Decision over top 10 prospect Dimentrko

-Lost decision to top 10 contender Povetkin after busting up his face in first 5 rounds.

 

It wouldn't matter if you started a thread entitled " Larry Holmes gives 1 million dollars to charity. "

Bummy is still bound to appear out of the blue and say exactly this :

" Holmes fought in a very weak era and never fought Page,Dokes,Tate, coetzee,Thomas,Mother Theresa, or Jesus Christ almighty.."

Most of us who have been here for 3 or 4 years have been hearing the same song and dance with every thread where Holmes' name is even briefly mentioned.

 

Actually Tyson's comp was very much on par with Holmes'

 

Holmes would fight all 4 of them like he fought Cooney using movement and pot shotting them with the Jab and throwing the occasional right hand and would look to 'drown' them late as Larry used to put it. If Cooney could last 13 I see no reason the fighters listed would not last that if more.


Holmes was a damn good fighter and would be a tough out for any Heavyweight in History but he would be giving up height, reach, and weight in almost all of these fights. I think he would beat Bowe. Lewis would beat Larry I think too big and too skilled and smart. Wlad would probably go like the Cooney fight a late stoppage for Larry. Vitali, because of his size, Iron Chin, lean back style and stamina I think would beat Larry on points.

I am not taking away from Holmes I just think these fighters were from a different era and going even 2-2 against the 4 is damn good and speaks about how great Larry really was. remeber Prime Holmes was around 6'3" and 215 pounds a far cry from what we have today in the Heavyweight Division.

:good

 

You've laid out the picture beautifully. :good

 

I would favor Holmes over all 4 guys. I don't think any of them would be wide wins or KO's either way. I believe he would have an easier time (not to be confused with an easy time!) with Vitali & Bowe...I believe Wlad & lennox would be ultra close, and Holmes would have to dig deep..But I would still excpect him to come out on top!

Now if you mean would I favor him over all 4 in succession, I am much less certain. I can't think of any HW who waded through 4 guys like that, in a row. I am doubtful that he or probably anyone could walk through a guantlet like that and imagine he would suffer a loss or 2 in a 4 fight stretch!

 

Holmes vs Lewis would be won at the weigh-in since they are so equally matched.

Whoever blinks will lose.

 

I don't think it's really that flawed. The difference is we know what Holmes is now. At that point in time he was proving himself. I mean, I think he was a frigging underdog against Ali if you can imagine.