How many spots did George Foreman and Larry Holmes move up with their comebacks

Holmes never really moved up; he was thought to be great by 1985 amongst most BRIGHT MINDED historians.......... Foreman's comeback did wonders for his rep.........

MR.BILL

 

Holmes maybe very slightly.

Foreman got a massive boost. But he did more in his comeback. I mean, beating Briggs at 48 is probably equal to Holmes best thing being a clinic against Mercer.

 

People overrate Foreman from his comeback thats for sure. Losses to Holyfield, Morrison, Schulz and Briggs and a 1 off win against Moorer against the tide of the fight

 

Fixed.

 

I thought Foreman edged Schulz in a **** hair win on HBO back in 1995........ Also, it was / is another one of those UNDERRATED title fights at heavyweight........ I love that fight........ It brought in HUGE ratings for HBO...............

MR.BILL

 

I think that Foreman benefited imensley.

Before his comeback he was esentialy a flash in the pan champion with one great win among a sea of mediocrity, and some historians rated him lower than Frazier. Having a second great win 20 years later certainly cleared up a lot of doubt about how much of his first great win had been due to circumstance as oposed to ability.

In the case of Holmes his status probably didn't change much among those who rated him but for me the Mercer fight settled a lot of lingering doubts.

 

Holmes lost to Brian Nielsen LSD12 for Nielsen's IBO HW Title. I thought Holmes did enough to win.

An overlooked fight is McCall W12 Holmes for McCall's WBC HW Title. McCall was at his best but won by just a point. Holmes was 45 1/2 years old and fought a very good fight.

Holmes gave Holyfield problems but lost about 7 or 8 rounds out of 12 rounds for the Undisputed HW Title.

Holmes did not look good in his win over Mo Harris and a case can be made that Harris won this fight.

Holmes did look good in his wins over Ray Mercer W10, Jose Ribalta W10, Jesse Ferguson W10, Ed Donaldson W10, Quinn Navarre W10, Bonecrusher Smith KO8, and Mike Weaver KO6.

At age 52 1/2 he came back and won a clear decision over Butterbean W10. He had not fought for about 2 years.

He didn't have the pop in his punches that he had in the late 70's and early 80's but he was still very crafty and for most of these fights he was well prepared.

90's Holmes vs. 90's Foreman? Most will probably say Foreman but I think Holmes would do just enough to win a decision.

 

Even as a Foreman fan who never liked Holmes on a personal level, I really believe Holmes would've completely dictated a fight with Foreman at any time in the nineties and that's why Foreman didn't want that fight.

 

George moves up higher because he regained the title. Holmes fought competitively better against the stylists. Foreman was popular, Holmes bored most. I appreciate both guys, but I saw through a lot of Foremans careful matchmaking, and the one sided losses made that cherry picking even look worse.

 

Holmes had already went 21-3 in HW World Title fights before his comeback in 1991. Many already considered him one of the top 5 HWs ever. He didn't have to do anything else.

Foreman's comeback was bigger than Holmes... even if Holmes would have got the nod vs. McCall. Had Holmes did enough to beat Holyfield things might have been different though.

Foreman beat some bums but he beat decent fighters as well. He looked great smashing guys like Steve Zouski KO4, Bobby Crabtree KO6, Tim Anderson KO4 (Holmes stopped him in 1 BTW), Rocky Sekorski KO3, David Jaco KO1, Terry Anderson KO1, etc.

He even looked great vs. fighters like Dwight Qawi KO7, Bert Cooper KO2, Gerry Cooney KO2, and Adilson Rodrigues KO2.

Thru his first 24 comeback fights only Everett Martin lasted the distance (Martin was down once though and only won about one round).

Foreman gave Holyfield a good fight and proved he could take punishment and go 12 tough rounds vs. the best in the world.

Foreman won his next 3 but he was starting to slip in my opinion. I feel that he had reached the peak of his comeback in the Holyfield fight after that point he started to slowly fade. He was fighting and training less frequently and doing more TV appearances, etc.

He beat Jimmy Ellis (not that Jimmy Ellis) KO3, Alex Stewart WMD10 (he had Stewart down twice but took a lot of punishment in this fight), and Pierre Coetzer KO8 (Foreman actually looked great but it was Coetzer's 3rd KO loss in a row vs. top fighters).

After the strong win over Coetzer I thought Foreman was back in top late 80's/early 90's form, but I was wrong. Foreman was all over the TV between the Coetzer and Morrison fight. He didn't look good vs. Morrison and lost by decision.

Foreman didn't fight for about a year and a half and when he went up against Moorer for the HW World Title few thought he would win. Foreman was outboxed for most of the fight but in the 10th.... POW, new champ!

Foreman was hot and cold after the Moorer fight and he scored no more KOs. He looked old vs. Schulz but got the nod. He went 12 rounds with 10 second Jimmy Thunder KO victim Crawford Grimsley. He won a close hard fought decision vs. Lou Savarese (good fight), and he was ripped off in the Briggs fight.

I don't think that Morrison would have been able to beat the version of Foreman that fought Holyfield or even Qawi or Coetzer.

 

Foreman moved up a lot more, and it's not just because he regained the title.


Holmes had already fought into his late 30s before the 90s comeback. We had already seen him perform as a veteran fighter and there weren't many questions about his place in history. When he came back, it didn't seem like he had been gone for long anyway.

Foreman, on the other hand, had disappeared for 10 years after retiring in his physical prime. There were a lot more "what-ifs" with Foreman's career. His comeback answered a lot of questions about his heart, stamina, durability, and ring smarts. Regaining the title topped it all off. Holmes, by comparison, was just showing us what he had been all along.

Since Foreman showed us a lot we didn't know about him, and added more to his resume, he moved up more.

 

I think most historical lists had Frazier above Foreman before the sucesses of his comeback.

Actually, I'd probably still put Frazier above Foreman, personally. Foreman's comeback was remarkable simply because he was eventually taken seriously and went a full 12 rounds with Holyfield, but he was lucky to be given that title shot at Moorer (totally undeserved), who himself wasn't much of a champion. Great come-from-behind KO win, and great story, but needs to be balanced out with his performances against such men as Alex Stewart and Tommy Morrison, who both (I felt) beat him in between the Holyfield and Moorer fights.
It was basically his second or third comeback WITHIN his comeback career, so that was remarkable. But he was undeserving of the shot in the first place.

Holmes I think was already established as a top all-time heavyweight prior to his comeback, so it didn't mean an awful lot. 1992 against Mercer and Holyfield was cool, but I didn't like watching flabby old Holmes after that.

 

Foreman benefited immensely.

Foreman's resume lacks depth and without his second career he'd fall out of the top 10. But winning the HW title 20 years after he lost it counts for something.

Holmes not so much. Everything he did up until 1985 solidified his place in history. His win over Mercer IMO solidified a top 5 place.

 

I think both guys moved up a bit. Foreman more than Holmes simply because he had an upset win in a title match.