How Highly Would've Rated Larry Holmes Had He Beat......

He would absolutely be number one if he accomplished all that.

 

While Holmes’ resume, strictly speaking, might put him below several other ATGs, I rate him highly in respect of the all so important intangible ATG qualities he upheld over his whole career - courage, fierce determination, will to win, when the going got tough he became even tougher, etc.

If it came down to those qualities against any other ATG (and I understand that falls into the H2H category) - Larry would not disappoint or leave you wanting. However you rate his opp. overall, he firmly instilled the said confidence (as described above) in him to lay it all down (at least in my view).

 

He didn't need any of those mentioned to move him up in the all-time heavy rankings. I thought this was going to be "had he not lost to Spinks and beaten Tyson". Had he beaten Mike Tyson, that would have moved him up for sure. Spinks was smaller and he was supposed to beat him, so that would not have done anything.

 

No really, all these guys held the "other" title for about 5 minutes while Holmes held the lineal title for 7 years. As soon as any of them seemed to be a threat they immediately lost their title and ceased to matter. I find it hard to believe anyone thinks Mike Weaver would fair better in a rematch or looses any sleep over not seeing this happen. I see most of the guys listed as interchangeable with the blokes Larry beat as defences. Swap out Witherspoon for Greg Page or Dokes for James Smith, I don't see any vast difference in how you would rate Holmes, whether you rate him top 3 or top 20 it wouldn't change anyone's mind IMO.

Also without being overly harsh these guys were talented but lacked everything Larry had, clean living, hard work, dedication to his craft and the ability to bounce back from live or death moments. If any of them has won the other title and defended 4 or 5 times against decent opponents then I could understand there being a bit of a mark against Larry not unifying but we have a grand total of 2 successful defences for Weaver, 1 for Thomas, 1 for Dokes and zero for Coetzee, Page and Tate.

 

I reckon he'd be top of the pops in that case. There's something very appealing about an unbeaten record at world champion level. It becomes hard to argue against such a fighter, especially when he looks good to the eye like Holmes. I'd feel fairly confident arguing for Holmes over Ali or Louis if he'd beaten that lot and Spinks and retired unbeaten.

 

It wouldn't move the needle for me much at all..perhaps it would cement him at #3 just past the Big Dog. I have Larry Holmes pretty much even with Lennox and flip-flop them 3 and 4 depending on the day.


None of those guys he didn't fight were consistent. HeLL Witherspoon and The Truth were tougher matchups for Old Holmes than Page would have been. I love the way Mr. Holmes handled his career at that stage.

 

Have him at 2 or 3 all time. Better than the possible opponents listed so doesn't change anything for me

 

If he beat all of them hypothetically speaking perhaps 2nd IMO.

 

Wouldn't care if he beat Weaver again. He already beat him convinvingly and nobody wanted to see the rematch at the time.

I also don't really see when he could have fought Tate. Arum didn't want him to face Holmes in the first defence and he lost to the guy, whom Holmes already beat. Larry will also beat Berbick who beat Tate too.

Dokes, Page, Coetzee and Thomas would be great additions to his resume, but I don't think it would get him closer to Ali/Louis who are number 1 and 2 on my list. He actually signed to fight Coetzee, but the funding through.

 

Wouldn't have mattered. From the silliness I've seen on this board about him for the last ten years, he could have defended against Lorenzo Zanon thirteen times and he'd still be regarded as an "All Time Great".