Do you hold it against Larry Holmes for not fighting Greg Page

I'm pretty sure Marvis Frazier was ranked when Tyson beat him. Might not appear in the ring's annual ratings page, but he had to have been right around the time they fought. Dude had beaten Smith, Tillis, Broad, Ribalta and Bugner, and had only been beaten by Holmes.

 

Spinks was the linear and IBF champion. Berbick the WBC and Witherspoon the WBA. The outstanding challengers were proberbly Tony Tucker, Carl Williams, Bonecrusher Smith, maybe even old man Weaver and perhaps Thomas and Tubbs as ex champions. Tyson did not face either one of them to earn his crack at Berbick. At least Larry Holmes had to beat Shavers to get get his shot.

 

exactly and Thank you for saving me the trouble to answer. I see so many liberal excuses for Holmes but he did not fight the best of his era. When he fought Weaver that fight made Weaver but remember Weaver was losing to the like of Rodney Bobick and others he had 9 loses. Weaver had Holmes hurt several times and it was a big confidence boost for Weaver. Holmes somehow avoided the best of his times and they all had to fight one-another.....there were a few guys that would have beaten Holmes prior to M.Spinks and I was surprised at the time that Spinks beat him, it was never done before and the guys Holmes avoided were much more dangerous for him

Even Coetzee was robbed dropping Snipes 2X but King stole the nod and got Snipes the shot but Snipes nearly ended it for Holmes, what would make anyone think that Coetzee,renewed Weaver,Page,Dokes,THomas,Tate, would not have been more dangerous than Snipes?

Leon Spinks was KO'd in 1 rd by Coetzee and Holmes gave him the title shot

10 fight Marvis was the perfect foil because although he won a few over the stinking bunch he never showed any power to be concerned with filling the Holmes pattern of 13 fight Ocasio, the Europeon trio, 14 fight Bey,ScottFrank, Jones and he thought Snipes.

bottom line is Holmes never unified,never rematched a tough fight and avoided the top guys of his era. You can blame it on the other organizations but that is where Vlad stands head and shoulders above Holmes

in comparison to Dempsey, Holmes is much more tarnished by ducks

 

Frazier was higher than some of those guys you mentioned. Certainly Smith whom he had beaten. It wasn't until Marvis lost in 30 seconds to Tyson that he was knocked completely out of the ratings. Truth got sparked in two rounds by Mike Weaver in 1986 and did nothing for the rest of that year. Weaver lost to Smith, Thomas and Ruddock around that time frame. Tucker had beaten nobody. Tubbs lost to Witherspoon in early 1986 and took the next 15 months off before facing a string of journeyman in '87. Marvis was one of the few contenders who was actively beating decent opponents on a regular basis without losing. Spinks, Witherspoon, and Berbick were the belt holders that year, and the argument was about weather or not Tyson beat a ranked contender to face one of them which he did..

 

Smith erased his losses to Witherspoon and Frazier with exciting wins in 1986 over Weaver (who had just bust Carl truth Williams bubble) Jesse Ferguson, David Bey and knocking Witherspoon out in one round for the WBA title. Tyson won the WBC title just weeks earlier with a far less impressive run of opponents. Marvis was his one fair pre title win of 1986. So there is an argument Smith was the only contender beating the rated guys in 1986. Buster Douglas went unbeaten in 1986 beating recent ex champ Greg Page where as USBA champ Tony Tucker was 30-0. By rights in November 1986 the best contenders that year were Smith, Douglas, Tucker and Tyson in that order.

 

Smith beat witherspoon on the tail end of 1986 by which point Marvis had already lost to Tyson and Tyson had already become champ. The spoon fight is widely viewed as a dive anyway on Tim's part. Ferguson was losing to everyone in 1986. Weaver was washed up. Marvis had beaten Smith that very same year along with a few others.. I don't see the argument that Smith was better.

Well if we're talking about what they did in their runs up to winning an alpha strap then the Berbick and WItherspoon fights don't count. So we'll work from there. I think we'll look at their last 10 fights...

JAMES SMITH'S 10 FIGHTS PRIOR TO WINNING WBA

1. David Bey - Win
2. Jesse Ferguson - Win
3. Mike Weaver - Win
4. Marvis Frazier -

This content is protected

5. Tim Witherspoon -

This content is protected

6. Jose Ribalta - Win
7. Tony Tubbs -

This content is protected

8. Larry Holmes -

This content is protected

9. Frank Bruno - Win
10.Rahim Muhammad - Win

MIKE TYSON'S 10 FIGHTS PRIOR TO WINNING WBC

1. Alfonzo Ratliff - Win
2. Jose Ribalta - Win
3. Marvis Frazier - Win
4. Lorenzo Boyd - Win
5. William Hosea - Win
6. Reggie Gross - Win
7. Mitch Green - Win
8. James Tillis - Win
9. Steve Zouski - Win
10. Jessie Ferguson - Win

Frankly I don't see a vast difference in quality here unless you're going to claim that Smith was more deserving of a title shot based on some of the fights that he lost. Of their last 10 fights going into their title bouts, Tyson won all 10 of his while smith only won 6. In fact, they even faced a few of the same opponents, Marvis Frazier who smith lost to while Tyson dispatched in 30 seconds. Jesse ferguson and Jose Ribalta who Tyson beat decisively while Smith barely squeaked out decisions, etc.. Obviously Larry Holmes, Tony Tubbs and Tim Witherspoon were better fighters than a lot of the guys Tyson was facing.. But I don't see a contender as gaining rights to a title shot based on fights that he lost.

By year end 1986 perhaps.. Not necessarily during the exact timing of the fights we're referencing though.. Marvis had beaten better fighters than Smith, Tucker or Douglas, and even beat SMITH himself..

 

Always felt something was up with that Berbick loss, can't prove it, but it is what it is.Trevor mauled him like crazy, from the 2nd on.

 

Carl Williams was the new kid on the block after taking Holmes to the wire. He established himself as the future of the division even losing that fight. Weaver knocks him out then Smith Knocks Weaver out. That puts Smith right where Carl Williams was dosnt it? A complete turn around from losing to Fraizer, he even erases the Witherspoon loss with that shock win. Bey and Ferguson were erratic fringe guys but a level above Alfonso Ratliff and Lorenzo Boyd types.

No a contender never gains a shot based on fights he lost but it kind of shows how he fairs at top level. Until Tyson fights Berbick we didn't know how how he would fare at top level did we?

Smith clearly turned a corner beating Weaver. That was a fight he would lose around the time he fought Frazier. He beats Bruno then the Holmes shot comes far too soon and he's over his head but he rebuilds with the Weaver win then stays active at a top level. I think in 86' Smith was a good contender.

On TYsons list there is nobody there that could ever beat a Bruno a Weaver or a Witherspoon is there? Just a lot of build up guys isn't it? Bey would beat the William hosea, Gross, Boyd types. Ferguson, green and Tillis were the only ones with a pulse really. Frazier was a stunning win but he was no Mike Weaver or Tim Witherspoon was he?

I think Smith is the one good win on Marvis's record to be honest. Even that needs to be taken into context of how badly Smith was doing during that lull in his career. I don't think funso banjo or Joe Bugner really were better fighters than Buster Douglas or Tony Tucker when Marvis fought them.

 

Please.. Williams has one big fight in a losing effort to an aged Holmes then gets dusted by Weaver.. Weaver lost to Thomas, Smith AND Ruddock in the course of about a year. You're putting way too much stock in these victories. Everybody and their brother was beating Bey and Ferguson between 1985-1986. yes they were better than Lorenzo Boyd and Alfonso Ratliff, but those weren't the only men I listed were they?

Well we sure knew how Smith faired at top level and he flopped against nearly everyone who was better than a 35 year old Mike Weaver or David Bey.

Agreed. He was a " good" contender. Was he more deserving of a title shot at Spoon than Tyson was at Berbick? I disagree.

This argument kinda gets thrown out the window with Marvis Frazier beating Smith and then Tyson beating Frazier... Why you seem to keep skipping over this obvious fact eludes me.

I wouldn't favor Bey over anybody with any certainty. He was a flash in the pan who beat greg page who everybody was beating and then lost to everyone else. Ferguson, Green and Tillis were right on par with most of the men Smith was beating and Frazier was better than anyone Smith was beating prior to getting his title shot including Smith himself.

No.. He was a prime contender actively beating good opponents and who didn't throw the fight when Tyson fought him as Witherspoon did against Smith. Furthermore, we've already established that Spoon and Berbick don't count in the discussion as the argument is about " who Tyson and Smith beat to EARN their title shots. "

The only win of note on Tucker's record prior to beating Douglas in 1987 was James Broad who Marvis had already beaten.. Meaning that he had nothing on Marvis in 1986 except a corrupt promoter who was grooming him to be easy picking's for his prized race horse. Douglas had the Greg Page win... That's it... He had also been beaten by Ferguson, Mike White and David Bey early in their careers... The only man Frazier had lost to was Larry Holmes while compiling wins over Smith, Tillis, Ribalita, Broad, Banjo, Benton and a resurgent Joe Bugner... Not exactly the work of an ATG but better than anything Tucker or Douglas had done to that point..

 

SQ, know what you don't know. You sound terribly ignorant on this topic.

 

Another half baked response.

 

Bummy I love you but man you are hilarious when it comes to Holmes.

 

He, love you too but I lived the era and wanted to see the best fight the best and grew up with just one champ in each division.. There was a perfect time for a unification Holmes-Tate, then Holmes-Page, then Holmes-Coetzee, then Holmes-Thomas and Holmes-Dokes and Holmes -Weaver after renewed Weaver beat Tate and Coetzee

Then there was the rematch with Witherspoon and Williams after disputed wins, rematch with Norton, rematch with Weaver

none of these money-making fights ever happened and I was frustrated because I wanted to see these fights. Larry also loved the guys with 10-fight no punch Marvis, 12 fight Spinks (who was KO'd by Coetzee in 1, 13 fight Ocasio (Jaws couldn't crack an egg) Jones had no power and no skill,the Europe 3 retreads, Smith had a 14-1 record,Bey had 14 fights, WITHERSPOON 15 FIGHTS,Snipes 22, Frank?, LeDoux/ was there not better contenders available?

Best fighter he fought when he fought them, Shavers and 8 fight Kooney ...then he lost to Mike Spinks in MS first heavyweight fight and then the measuring stick Tyson

I am still mad when I think of his era and the split titles, it took me away from boxing for a while. I was disgusted with King paying ring magazine to boost ratings for Holmes opponents....this is all true look up King, John Ort, ring magazine scandal

 

IPoo

yes Weaver had lost to Thomas but the Williams fight was his comeback fight. Think about it. Williams really made a name for himself losing controversially to Holmes. Weaver was carefully selected as an elite name to establish Carl's permanent arrival on the world scene. Weaver spoils the party. He's back! Weaver beats the guy some guys think beats Holmes. What a comeback!

he did not flop against Witherspoon when it counted did he? 1986 was a good year for Smith. Don't you think he was a better fighter the second time around?

with hindsight yes, Smith was more deserving. AT the time kid Tyson was a knockout highlight reel with a refreshing style and a story. But he had not beat anyone. We all fell for it. We lost sight of what the seasoned heavyweights were doing in the ratings. Tyson proved himself by making that giant leap in class fighting Berbick. Actually, Tyrell Biggs was getting a better apreinicship at that time too. He was getting more resistance from veterans like Snipes, Bey and Tillis than the boyds, Ratliffs and Reggie Gross types Tyson was treading water with.

Yes Marvis beat Smith and stood still whilst Smith went away and improved. Marvis got beat by Tyson. The first elite guy since Holmes that Marvis fought. I think guys like Weaver proved more. Bey was competative at top level, he fared better vs the same Holmes Marvis fought.

Marvis Frazier was not better than Mike Weaver who had proven wins over ex champions and contenders. Marvis Frazier did not knock out Truth Williams.

The only difference between TYsons resume in 1986 and Tuckers was the exciting highlight reel that Jacobs was sending all the news channels. It was refreshing that he was fighting so often and a different style compared to the mostly Ali clones out there too. But it was not really that good opponents was it? No real names. Joe Louis beat ex champs on the way up. Where as we did not know if Tyson could make that leap until he signed to meet Berbick.

I think Greg Page on a guy's resume in 1985-1986 trumps all of that since Page is this guy that Holmes would not fight? Tuckers pre 1986 padded record was the same as TYsons too.