Why is Larry Holmes thought of so highly?

I'd rank Schmeling over the Klitschko's.

 

last great hw since Marciano. come to think it, i'll probably make his boxing record for wikipedia.

 

In H2H terms, it is not at all ridiculous ot have the Klitschkos in the top ten.

 

well if that is the fact then why do a lot of people (not me) rate marciano so highly ?? his era was even weaker and rocky's atg opponents where over the hill (louis/moore). i think there are more then enough good reasons to rate larry holmes at nr. 3 of all time heavyweight champs.

 

I belive Holmes had a weaker era than Marciano.

Norton, Cooney, Shavers were no Charles, Walcott or Moore imo.

And that was the best of Holmes 20 title defenses. Most of the guys he beat were ten-0 type of records.

 

China hand.

How was Foreman a better all round fighter than Ali? Ali did not gas out, better all rounders don't gas out against a guy you claim is better all round. Ali was never KO'd, had 25 title fights in 20 years. Fought punchers than Foreman and beat them all.

Nobody after Foreman lost in 1974 claimed George was ever a better all rounder than Ali.

Sonny Liston of 1964 could probably give George all he could handle, styles make fights.

 

Dempsey1238.

Norton (6'3", 217) , Cooney (6'7", 227) and Shavers (6', 211) would have been murderous in the 1950's. All three could have caused major problems to Marciano or anyone pre-Liston that era. Would Patterson had been champ had they they existed?

P4P they don't touch Moore, Walcott or Charles, but you would not put your house on those three, who are a 41 year old Moore beating a prime 1972 Norton, or the shop worn Charles that Rocky fought beating Cooney (the 6'7", 227 pound "Holmes" Cooney who would land that hook at some point), i think their best chance would be v shavers (and even then, Marciano probably did not hit as hard as Shavers).

I am not saying Cooney is superior to Charles, but remember the Rock never beat a prime Walcott or Charles, a past it Charles could probably lose to murderous hooking Cooney by KO.

 

Walcott was near his prime for Marciano I, He had just flatten and out pointed Charles going into the first Marciano fight.

Norton was pretty shopworn himself going into the Holmes fight, not long after that, Cooney would blast Norton out in 1 mere round. This was not the Kenny of the Ali fights.
And Holmes barely got past him.

Shavers, and Cooney are not even on the same level as Walcott or Charles imo. There is a reason these 2 are rated above Shavers and Cooney. Holmes expose Cooney, and Shavers prove how limit he was when he lost to OVer the hill, Shot Ali, Shavers failed in a fight he should have won. When 7-0 Spinks beats Ali, that relly tells how far Ali was past it.

Charles, and Walcott would have eaten and spit out the 1977-78 Ali imo.

 

I never said Shavers or Cooney were on the level on Walcott or Charles i made that clear. I stated that if you take a 1972 Norton or even the worn Norton who fought Holmes, he would be a danger for any of those guys (Walcott, Charles and Moore).

Norton was shop worn v Holmes, that is true, but he gave a 1978 Holmes a great fight weighing 220, and i always believed that 15th round belonged to Norton, not Holmes, who was getting the **** beat out of him until the last 60 seconds.

But...i agree Norton was shot more than 50 Cent v Shavers and Cooney, but both those men hit harder than Walcott, Charles and Moore (remember, i am not saying Norton, Cooney or Shavers were better.)

 

I think Holmes' wins over Norton, Cooney, Shavers, Witherspoon, Weaver, Berbick and Mercer are reasonably good scalps.

 

In composite terms? H2H and achievement? Over Vitali, sure - but Wlad's approaching undeniable status with his long and dominant reign, even if it's over a weak division.

 

Textbook Jab and solid straight right. Poor Holmes had to live in Ali's shadow for a few years and took the brunt of the criticism for beating Ali in a fight that should have never happened.

 

Foreman hit harder than Ali and that's about it.

Ali was waaay more talented,had a better chin,was heaps faster,had better footwork,defense,ring generalship etc,etc etc......oh and he ****ing well befuddled and knocked George out when they actually met.

I don't think it's subjective at all,99.99% of people say Ali's better to 00.01% (ie you) who say Foreman.

 

I agree Godking. Holmes would jab Baer to death, however it would not be as exciting and brutal as the Louis v Baer fight.