Larry Holmes question

would be safe to assume that Foreman is taking Holmes spot on
your top 10 heavyweights list? ( by looking at your two threads)

 

Either that or hes placing Moorer on his top ten list. First of all Moorers win over Holyfield was very controversial. What makes Moorer such a great heavyweight? Besides losing to Foreman after winning every round, and getting knocked out by Holyfield the second fight and getting knocked out by Tua, he fought a pretty large list of nobodies at heavy. His biggest win was controversial the rest of his big fights he lost. Your reaching, my friend.

 

If your discounting a proven great heavyweight in Holmes by comparing him to Moorer it most certainly is...

 

Yes but you already pointed out why. Wasnt Briggs considered the linear champion? He was still a garbage fighter. Moorer was never a great heavyweight. Quit analyzing everything as if it was written out on paper, if you dont know the history behind the who and the what, its meaningless.
First off he was a true heavyweight. I would say defeating Norton and defending the title 20+ times against a real good group before losing it controversially to Spinks eclipses what Foreman did to a guy who really had no consistency in the heavyweight division. You cant even compare the two. I know what your getting at, a singular event, but you cant debate it like that, because like I said, it would be the same as comparing it to Briggs lifting the so called linear title off of Foreman. History will never put too much greatness in that event.

 

Tim Witherspoon
Ken Norton - Yes even 34 year old Ken
Mike Weaver
Bonecrusher Smith
Ray Mercer
Trevor Berbick
Gerry Cooney
Earnie Shavers- 1st time, Holmes fought younger shavers before earnie knocked out norton. Shavers still had a good deal left in 77.
Michael Spinks- If we decide to give larry to deserved nod in rematch


Thats 9 Men. of course this is just my opinion.

 

i think a better question is why do you put so much stock into this moorer victory. foreman got his ass beat for 10 rounds before moorer got sloppy. so its not a very impressive vicory to begin with.

also, who did moorer ever beat really. his first fight with vander was questionable to say the least, add to that vanders health problems at the time and you have a fluke( as shown by the 2nd fight). his next best opponent was tua, and he didnt even make it outta the first round. moorers best legit victory is against bert cooper for chrissake, and he failed to distinguish himself from a c class slugger there.

my point is moorer isnt that good, and even if you believe he is good foreman still got his ass beat by him, so i wouldnt put too much into that moorer victory as the manner it was achieved was hardly one to be proud of.

i would rank holmes's victory over mercer much higher, it was a comprehensive victory over a prime, in shape, and dangerous mercer who would go on to give holyfield and lewis all they could handle.

what makes holmes even more impressive to me(though i doubt your interested) is what the fighters had to work with at the time of there vicrories. foreman is a power puncher who keeps more of his assets as he ages. holmes best assets which were reflexes, stamina, speed, footwork, do not carry with age. just something to think about.

 

No offence but Moorer couldn't carry Holmes'... never mind

One thing to consider about Holmes reign is that even he didn't unify the title(he wanted to) he did beat several guys that went on to win the other title while he was still champ. Mike Weaver, Tim Witherspoon and James Smith all claimed the WBA belt while Holmes was still reigning. Trevor Berbick claimed the WBC as well.

 

Don't forget incredible will to win and great durability. Pretty canny too second career. All this aided to an overall poor division certainly helped.

 

:roll::roll: Stop the Bull****.

Stopt trying to build Moorer into something he was not .

Moorer a chinny ex LHW who won a controversial decision over Holyfield thus becoming a WEAK ''lineal'' champion who lost his belt in a fight he should have easily won.

That is all Moorer ever was .

Whats next are you going to claim that Moorer could have beaten a prime Holmes .

Witherspoon was 3 times better then Moorer on his best day overall lazyness and the fact that Holmes was the lineal champion at the time and after him Tyson prevented him from being lineal champion.

Cut the crap Foremans 90s carreer was mostly smoke and mirrors we get it you are in love with the MYTH of 90s Foreman others are not and see his 90s carreer for what it really was.