Why is it not held against Holmes legacy more that he was never the undisputed HW champion of boxing

It's not an exaggeration actually. Some might go post Cooney, but he announced he'd be taking it easy to all and sundrey after Witherspoon.

Cobb was fine, he was rated #9 and tho well suited to Holmes, was a tough guy who could last all night.

Rodriguez wasn't even rated. He was easy pickings. Holmes won every minute of every round against Cobb, a fringe contender and Rodriguez was a very uninspired choice. How the WBC had him in their top 10 i will never know. Holmes won every round against him, not surprisingly.

Witherspoon - A lot of people get confused with the timeline here. Witherspoon had very little fanfare before fighting Holmes. He was rated #10 by Ring and was a whopping 6-1 underdog just 15 fights under his belt. Witherspoon wasn't chosen because he was seen as a worthy or dangerous challenger. He was seen as an easy win. In hindsight he is seen as quite a worthy win, but going in he was anything but. In his previous fight he'd snuck by Renaldo Snipes via a somewhat controversial majority decision. Snipes himself was coming off a draw to the barely regarded Scott Frank, and his previous loss to Holmes.

Summed up Witherspoon wasn't meant to cause so much trouble. There's a message in that. Snipes out of the blue dropped Holmes and had him falling facefirst into the turnbuckle upon rising. Shavers had been shutout by Holmes in a previous fight before almost taking Holmes out in the rematch. Weaver was supposed to be a glorified sparring sesson yet took Holmes to the brink. Yet we always see people writing off the chances of guys like Page, Thomas, Dokes and every other name that comes up. In the real world Holmes struggled with lesser fighters than those he's gifted sure fire wins over, and at a younger age too.

Marvis Frazier - Frazier snuck into 10th in the Ring and wasn't even rated by the WBC hence they refused to sanction the fight. As a matter of fact it was reported that the title would have been declared vacant if Holmes lost. Post Witherspoon Holmes was done with tough competition. He was demanded to fight Greg Page who had beaten Snipes to become his mandatory. The WBC stated he would be stripped if he did not fight Page after Frazier. Frazier was a cherry picked opponent with just 10 fights under his belt and had never beaten a contender. Eddie Futch pleaded with Holmes to get him out of there fast so he wouldn't get hurt too much, such was the mismatch.

James Smith - Yet another fringe contender type at #9. He had 15 fights to his name with one loss and, unless Bruno was somehow ranked, had never beaten a contender. Bruno was easily outpointing him before Smith went hard with 2 minutes to go and knocke dhim out. The bookies didn't even put up odds of Smith winning, it was about how long he'd last. Holmes was piling up points but he was hurt on two separate occasions when his experience and Smith's lacked thereof was of solid importance.

The point again is that Holmes struggling with fringe dwellers like this gives the best fighters in the division great hope.

David Bey - Bey had beaten Page who was on an inconsistent run (rebound fight after losing to Witherspoon) and was put into #3 despite never having beaten another contender. He had 14 fights under his belt and was a 4-1 underdog as Holmes hadn't looked the best vs Smith. Bey hurt him early on but Holmes took control as the bout went on and battered him at the end.

After the bout Holmes said -

"I want a lot of money and no more of those big hitters like Tim Witherspoon and Mike Weaver," said Holmes, narrowing the field to almost nobody. "I've paid my dues, and if they want me back, they've got to give me little people I can beat on without getting hurt."

The 35-year-old champion suggested that $3 million would entice him out of his rocking chair in Easton, Pa. to fight Michael Spinks, the light heavyweight champion. And, grinning, he said, "Only $2 million for either Tommy Hearns or Marvin Hagler."

Carl Williams - Williams had just 16 fights under his belt and was a 6 1/2 - 1 underdog. Yet again (there's a recurring theme here) Holmes was extended far more than expected in a fight a decent amount of people thought he lost. Williams wasn't even rated by Ring magazine.

I've got an article somewhere that talked about how Holmes chose Williams. He watched footage of him fighting Tillis and after Tillis dropped him twice in the forst he said get him. Hedidn't watched the rest where Williams boxed his ears off.

Michael Spinks - There's nothing wrong with the light heavyweight champion getting a gig but it came after a long line of carefully selected fringe contenders fights, and even a non contender. Spinks was 6-1 against and wasn't expected to cause much drama. He ended Holmes reign.

As i showed above these were gren, inexperienced mostly frigne contenders, if that. It was a sorry bunch. The cticism is him not fighting top contenders, no-ones going to worry about him not fighting fringe guys, and worse.

No. Spinks was a cherry pick gone wrong tho, as everyone knows. At one point he tried to sell Cooney for his 50th fght. I've got an article somewhere that tells how his choice of Williams came about and how he wanted someone easy for his 50th to beat Marciano. Hopefully i get time to find it.

Some top 5 fighters mixed in.

It was, yes. As i have exdplaiend Witherspoon was #10 and no-one rated him much. It's not like he chose Witherspoon when he was top 5.

Certainly not Smith, Frank, Williams, Frazier and co.

Rocky rematched the best contenders in his division. Rocky's championship acumen was brilliant. Witherspoon was remotely considered "dangerous" going into the fight.

 

Norton would have had to have been straight away. Plenty did that of course, Louis with Walcott after a tough fight, Rocky with both Walcott and Charles after tough fights, Leon Spinks with Ali, the list goes on. Of course a pertinent one is Michael Spinks gave Holmes an immediate rematch after a close first fight.

But Norton as a stand alone isn't a biggie. It's more that he never rematched any of his tough fights, and he had quite a few. Joe Louis wanted them again, to show people there was no dispute that he was the man.

Weaver didn't simply just get stopped by Holmes then lose to Dokes and Thomas. He didn't lose for another 3 1/2 years. 3 1/2 years is a long time. He knocked out (young and undefeated, Olymipic medal as well) Tate for the WBA crown. Tate had a bit of a following and some even thought he might even be the man. He was rated second to Holmes when Weaver took him out.

Weaver then knocked out Gerrie Coetzee, who was rateed #3 in the world. Here's something to get your head around - at this point Weaver had more wins over top 5 heavyweights than Larry Holmes. Weaver was rated 2nd to Holmes for around 2 1/2 years or more. Weaver was also wanting to fight Holmes. Their fight was a classic, with Weaver looking like he might bring it home at times and according to most observers droppping Holmes. Getting stopped at the finish means little. Thousands of boxers have come back to avenge stoppage defeats. He'd also gained experience knocking out world class top 3 opponents in Coetzee and Tate.

They could have rematched instantly. In post fight material Holmes said he wasn't getting one so the window meant nothing. The crowd booed the decision. Many scored it for Witherspoon. What would Rocky or Joe Louis have done? We already know.

• The crowd booed when the decision was announced in favor of Holmes. Many felt that Witherspoon deserved the verdict. A straw poll taken at ringside had Witherspoon winning by two points. Boxing Monthly listed the fight as one of its ten most controversial fights of all-time.

It'd have to be pronto again, but Holmes was never taking on a guy that gave him such a tough fight. It went agaisnt everything he was trying to do - get easy fights, break Marciano's record and retire.

He avoided all the top guys post Witherspoon. It's beyond debatable.

Holmes stated himself "i am ducking Greg Page". Is that enough? Sure, he cited money as the reason. He was back fighting for King in no time, but only against low rated fighters. Holmes dropped his long held WBC title rather than defend against Page. I'll do a spiel on the whole saga at some point in this thread.

Not if they were top 5.

 

Dokes was a top #5 heavyweight for 3 1/2 years while Holmes reigned (mostly top 3 in this period). You don't think he'd be better than the vast majority of Holmes defenses? Why would beating the best fighters in the division not help ones resume? Who would you point to in Ali or Louis' reign that was ranked that high for that long that never got a fight? Wlad's reign even? I mean, we have his brother and rest assured that hinders him for me but at least it's understandable.

No.

Holmes dropped his title to avoid fighting Page. He said he was ducking him. Page had lost one fight when Holmes wouldn't take him as a mandatory. He won an eliminator to fight him, like Shavers and Spinks. Holmes only had one title when he relinquished it. I provided photographic proof in here many years ago that the fight opened with Holmes 8-5 fave (Compare that to the odds against the sorry string he fought thereafter). KO Magazine stated "If he fights the champion the way he did Snipes - aggressively, jabbing and then forcing his way inside - he may find himself in the right fight at the right time to become a world champion. Page was on an inconsistent string post Snipes, his problem was always motivation. He pole axed Gerrie Coetzee when motivated later on.

The best contenders fought each other on a regular basis because Holmes froze them out. That led to plenty of losses as the best were fighting the best (best except Holmes). Dokes fought Weaver x 2 then Coetzee, Page fought Witherspoon, Coetzee, Thomas fought Witherspoon, Weaver and Cetzee climbing the rankings etc. Tubbs came into the picture late etc. There was a load of fights between the top contenders.

He somply didn't, certainly not post Witherspoon. It's not debatable. You don't get freebie wins without actually beating people. Everyone was sure he'd beat Spinks too. They were sure Bey/Smith/Williams/Witherspoon would all be easy.

But they didn't lose to Larry. The whole A/B/C thing doesn't hold water. The best guys he beat Berbick/Weaver/Witherspoon were considered easybeats at the tim ehe fought them - they made waves against Holmes and thereafter. Berbick beat Page, Snipes beat Berbick then Page easily beat Snipes. I could do a thousand of such simple examples.

A handful of the very best. Page and Dokes were long term top 5 guys, for years. Sure, he tried to fight Coetzee near the end but he doesn't get the victory for trying. If he hadn't priced himself so high it likely would have happened. Thomas made a big mark in a short time too. He beat Witherspoon with far less trouble than Holmes and then axed Weaver. He'd drew Coetzee well prior. Holmes purposely shut him out tho, which I'll prove beyond dispute later on in the weekend. I'll tag you.

Holmes didn't come close to cleaning out the division.