Current heavyweights wouldn't stand a chance in my era

What he said

 

Yeah. I'm sure I've seen Mike Tyson say similar stuff.

The fighters seem about as split on the old Vs new argument as this forum.

 

I remember an interview with Floyd Patterson in Boxing News many years ago (must have been around the time Tyson started to make waves)... where he claimed Mike wouldn't even make the Top-10 back in his heyday.

Yeah, some things never change!

 

None of them would have had a chance against Holmes that's for damn sure!

 

Well said.
Apart from Liston, Tyson would kill the rest, they'd flee from the ring with their pants filled with poop, like rats flee a sinking ship.

 

Considering Holmes and Foreman retired and made late comebacks w great success in their mid 40s it’s hard to argue with them. Only gotten worse since the 90s too. Until some promise recently. I like Fury and AJ not so much the over rated Wilder

 

Holmes beats all 3 in the span of 1 year. Convincingly at that.

 

Does he though?

As highly as I rate Holmes's skills, he was not exactly bold in choosing his challengers, nor dominant against the best of them!

 

I still wonder if the "ducking" thing has much validity. So...he ducked Page (but beat the guy who beat him). He beat Smith, Weaver, and Witherspoon, all who became champions not long after. Snipes, Cobb, and Berbick top 10, Cooney #1, Ocasio had just beaten Jimmy Young, Jones was undefeated in over 20 fights.

Who did he duck? Coetzee got knocked out by Weaver (who Holmes knocked the hell out of), Dokes never really, actually seemed to beat Weaver, Thomas was certainly no ball of fire, and Page got beat by people he should never have been beaten by.

Of course Holmes struggled in some defenses, that's what happens when you fight the people you're supposed to fight. Sure, Evangelista, Rodriguez, and Frank weren't anything to write home about. But every long time championship reign has padding.

All respect but I think that's a flawed assumption/cliche around here. Holmes fought the best (or the ones that beat the best) out there. Before he lost to Spinks he beat Smith and Bey, both were definitely valid contenders. He stopped them both, something neither Tyson nor Page could do (Page couldn't even beat Bey...or Berbick for that matter). He barely beat Williams, true, but Carl was also ranked.

He certainly dominated Berbick, Ocasio, Cooney, Bey, Smith...all well ranked contenders. Berbick won maybe three rounds at the outside and got his face pushed in by the jab.

 

What Holmes gets crap about is the same things guys today get praised for which is going where the money is. Do you really think guys like Page Thomas ect could have beat Holmes. Lol I dont. Holmes when he realized he was slipping went for the money. It's a double standard now.
I have all the confidence that Holmes beats them all in a row efficiently

 

I happen to like Deontay better than any other heavies today. But do any of us think his his title defenses were any more representive of the cream of the crop than Larry's? What about Wlad?

Frazier and Ali were for all purposes gone when Larry became champ. Foreman was gone. Norton was on his way out. If you look back in time, only Ali fought the most great fighters as (heavy) champ, and he padded things too. Louis did the same. And when it comes to heavies, it's hard to get better than Louis and Ali folks.