A great fighter,definitely! I have Larry at number 3 in the all time great heavyweight list second only to Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis. And the second best during my lifetime as a boxing fan based on the criteria of achievement and longevity.
Great fighter but he fought in a weak era. His resume doesn’t have near the quality of Ali, Lewis, or even Foreman imo. He’s a top heavyweight and is underrated. I would rank him in and around the 5th spot all time. Ali, Lewis, Louis, and Foreman all rank higher for me.
I think that where the threads start to pull apart on his case, is that he wasn't really defending against the best available, as Louis and Ali were. Add that to the fact that he didn't quite match their stats, and he is pushed very firmly into third place or lower.
Look, I am going to address you because you are a vastly knowledgeable and reasonable guy. I personally don't know how #3 is an option. He didn't seek out and beat the best of his era. He just didn't. Yes, he had 19-20 defenses depending on whether you count Marvis, but who were they against? And we have been over the why's and wherefores a hundred times in the classic section and elsewhere. Not all of the fights were on the table...but some of them were. Ali fought the best of his era. Louis fought the best of his era. Marciano fought the best of his era. Liston fought the best of his era. Charles fought the best of his era. Tyson fought the vest of his ear. Holyfield fought the best of his era. Lewis fought the best of his era. Johnson did not defend against the best, but beat the best on the way up. Quantity counts, but not when you avoiding the best possible fights. For me, lower end of top ten.
Ali Louis Lewis Holmes Wlad My top 5, and I can see a case for shuffling them depending on what you weigh more.
Ali and Louis are p4p top 20 types. Holmes isn't even in that neighbourhood, it's not a thought experiment I can really jive with.
If a case can (and has) been made for Johnson by knowledgeable people, the same can be done for Holmes, IMO. Criteria for ranking fighters aren't handed to us ready-made to be figured out, like the laws of physics are. But you may be right that the criteria in general circulation on BF24's Classic section preclude ranking Holmes as #1.
I can't remember a good case for Johnson as GOAT and he's lucky if he makes top #10 in the vast majority of lists I've seen and he's certainly rare in top #5's nowadays. If anything, strangely enough, he's probably a better chance of garnering a good argument than Holmes for GOAT given he's so far removed from Ali's era. I mean Louis reigned forever and a day without actively avoiding anyone, in fact he lusted after rematches with guys who gave him a difficult evening rather than avoiding them. Ali's record is laced with vanquished ATG's aside some serious longevity and a disgusting list of defeated top 10 contenders and indeed top #5. McGrains recent incredibly insightful thread on what heavyweights fought the best fighter on the planet most often saw Louis 9-1, Ali 8-2 and Holmes 1-1. So it's not so much loose BF24 criteria as pure common sense. There's a reason Ali and Louis are considered the best two heavyweight resumes with absolute daylight second by the vast majority of insightful judges.
THANK YOU! I thought I was losing my mind! Number 3 is crazy! Foreman, Marciano, and Lewis all have very strong claims for number 3. Holmes does not. Holmes didn't unify the belts and only defended his title against his number 1 contender once off the top of my head.