As a barometer, Who would have won a match between thier most important foes? Max Schmeling .Vs. Gerry Cooney?
If Larry beat say Page, Witherspoon in a rematch and Thomas i would probably be seriously comparing them for the number 2 spot. As it stands Joe definitely belongs ahead of Larry IMO. Joe's my number 2, Holmes is 4 or 5.
No worries, not much between the Bomber and Ali. I like Ali's for top opponent quality, buth others might prefers Joe's tremendous consistency and length of dominance. Each to their own on this one.
It's actually pretty close but I'll go with Louis. Louis would have most likely lost to 174 lb'er Conn in 41', had Conn not gotten cocky in rounds 12-13 and just boxed. Some do argue that Conn was just getting ground down though and he was fighting in survival mode. Question: How did the best black fighters do against the men that Louis did beat? Not quite the same as Louis fighting the black guys himself but that could shed some light on the competition. To be honest, I've never been too impressed with Holmes accomplishments. He was a great fighter but an old Kenny Norton gave a prime Holmes Hell for 15 rounds and that just sticks in my craw. A pretty unseasoned Cooney actually did some pretty good work against him, till Larry finally got him. Gotta give Larry a ton of credit for getting off the deck after he was bombed by Shavers. Man that may have been the best punch (especially from a freak like Shavers) that I have ever seen, where the recipient was able to rise from. Then he survives the round and stops Shavers.
Schmeling for sure but if you consider Cooney to be Holmses best oponent then you are selling him short a little.
Very true mate. Tho Cooney smashed an old Norton Kenny brought to the table lots more dangers to Holmes. Even a young Witherspoon was more dangerous than Gerry turned out. I know he had that power and potential in their match but truth be told Holmes was never in any danger and had the fight totally under control. I think Cooney could have developed into a much better and more rounded fighter given better guidance. With a lft hook like that one just needs some rounding out and he'sdangerous to most anyone. Lots of good quality sparring and learning, a decent schedule against properly chosen opponents to facilitate improvement, some hard work on defence and the right hand etc. The big likable oaf was born in the right era and could have potentially been murder on many of the fat and lazy contenders and champs of the day.
If you stack thier top 20 opponents from top to bottom, I think Holmes fought and beat better fighters. He fought more punchers, fighters with better winning percentages, did not pick on as many past their prime fighers, and did not use a color line. Louis best oppoents were Schemleing, Wlacott, Charles, M. Baer and Marciano. On a fair score card, his record is 3-4 vs these fighters. Holmes never struggled with the likes of Pastor, Farr, Godoy, or Galento. Holmes struggled with the likes of Witherspoon and Norton. See the difference?
Holmes best opponents were Tyson, Holyfield, Witherspoon, Norton. His record is an unimpressive 2-2 vs these fighters with very close decisions over Norton and Witherspoon On the other hand Holmes failed to meet more top contenders then Louis.
I listed five opponents for Louis, why not list five for Holmes? Add in Mercer, Cooney or Shavers, then Holmes is 3-2. Louis was never robbed on the cards. Holmes was. As for contenders, Louis had the ability to pick his own bum of the month club. That woudl not fly today. There were no mandatories back in Louis' day. Holmes had to deal with Don King and the alphabet poltics.
but he fought nearly all the top fighters there were. I mean you could argue that someone like Elmer Ray should have been given a chance but then again Louis beat Walcott who was the best black heavy outside of Louis himself Why list the Marciano or Chalres fights? Or Tyson for Holmes? That is not an indication of how good they were at their peaks
I do not think the heavies of the late 30's, or 40's were a great group. IMO, the fighters of the mid 70's to mid 80's were better. Give Godoy or Walcott the nod an all of a sudden Holmes has the record for most title defenses in a row. Louis came to power when the heavies were terrible. The title kept changing hands for fight to fight. Jimmy Braddock was the champion and was in active for two years before Louis took the title from him. W.W.II put a huge damper on boxing. Louis not fighting Sheppard, Ray, Thompson, Gaines, and other top black fighters was part of the color line. Bert Sugar says Louis avoided Rosenbloom. If you to talk primes, Holmes as undefeated in his, Louis was not. I also feel that Holmes was a better outside his prime.