How much higher would you rank Holmes...?

If he did all that i'd have him cemented completely into #3 at worst. The Spinks fights wouldn't make a difference as they all get old.

He'd be nudging Louis at #2.

As it is i usually rank him somewhere from #4 to say #6 depending on the day/week/month.

All this of course is assuming he won all those bouts. It would have been tough against that lot as he declined as we saw against guys like Witherspoon originally and Williams and finally Spinks.

But yeah with all that he'd be no lower than three and i could see myself having headaches over him and Louis as i contemplated things over time.

 

I've got Lennox Lewis for a multitude of reasons. The top pair are easy but after that it's wide open. There's not a lot between half a dozen guys or more.

 

I have Holmes at #3 in any case, so it would be hard to get much higher, really. I think if he'd have added those extra cherries to his record I'd still have him in the same place, but only a slighter behind Louis (my #2) rather than the wider margin I have him behind now.

 

Ultimately, The bottom line is that if Holmes did all that, I think there would be a stronger, almost universal argument that Larry is number 3 of all time. But there is a case that he could be #3 anyway without this. I rate him between 4 and 6. But I can’t argue if he’s higher on somebody’s list. Larry was one of the best.

I think those guys Witherspoon, Thomas, Page And Dokes - in the scheme of things were no more than just regular gate keeper types for that era. Mere rated contenders who didn’t get a shot at Larry. Historically Their belts meant squat. It should not confuse anybody.

The only logical, universally recognised leading contender to Holmes of this era was Gerry Cooney. And in 1979 perhaps Shavers or Coetzee after he beat Spinks in one round. And it’s the same for other champions too. Only few challengers are ever that legit.

Out of all those challengers, Schmeling, Conn and perhaps Nova were the only logical outstanding types joe Louis needed to defend against. All the others were stop gaps. Same with Ali. Patterson and Terrell were the only worthwhile challengers Ali had to logically defeat during his first reign.

If somebody decided to give Red Burman a belt during Joe Louis’ reign it wouldn’t or shouldn’t make Burman a key win for Joe Louis. Nor should it had he not fought him.

If Brian London or Zora Foley wound up with a belt the way Tony Tubbs did it shouldn’t make either of them key wins for Muhammad Ali. Nor should it had he not fought him.

Dokes, Spoon, Page, Thomas were just like the guys Ali defended his title to in the 1960s. Or the guys Louis defended against, because those guys never beat anyone regarded elite sensationally enough to demand universal recognition as an outstanding contender.

If Thomas beat Witherspoon in one round or even knocked him out you could say Pinklon truly proved to be a legitimate threat to Larrys domination. but he didn’t. Instead it was off the back of a draw with Coetzee and just a points win over the second best guy. Then Thomas lost to guy Larry already beat. It’s just regular contender form.

 

I rank Holmes in the top 5. He was excellent. He doesn't have Ali's resume of wins ( or losses ). I boils down to this.

FOREMAN. If Holmes replaced Ron Lyle or Jimmy Young, and beat Foreman as I suspect he would, he's the #1 overall heavyweight.

Foreman ducked Homes in the 80's, 90'.

 

Holmes ducked Foreman in the 70s as a tune up after the rumble in the jungle for Big George.

 

He refused to fight George some short time after the rumble in the jungle the “Ali wannabe” was seen as the perfect opponent for our grill overlord to feast on to regain his confidence.

 

Holmes fought Tyson in January 1988. If a money fight was there, he'd fight Foreman in 1987. Why not? Holmes called Foreman out a few times in the 1990's. The money was there.

Holmes has an underrated win over Williams in 1976. Williams was a big man and puncher. He also beat Shavers in 1978, who IMO had faster hands than Foreman did, and proved his chin could take a bomb. If the year is 1977, Holmes probably defeats Foreman the same way Jimmy Young did. 1978, very likely. 1976, maybe. Put this win on his resume, and few would be better.

 

Why I think Holmes is top 5:

Holmes' 19 consecutive title defenses. That's impressive. Only Joe Louis and Wladimir Klitschko had more consecutive title defenses, and with Louis, most think was a little lucky to win the first Walcott fight.

Holmes was 48-0 at one point. He certainly could have tied Marciano's record if his opponent was different. A much young Spinks won it, but Holmes sure did win the re-match in a fight best described as a robbery.

I consider both Witherspoon and Norton to be to 30 all time heavyweights. Homes has two wins official over Hall of fame opponents, three if the 2nd Spinks fight was judged correctly and possibly four if Witherspoon makes the hall of fame.

A great older fighter past the age of 40, Holmes has a win over Mercer. While he lost to a prime Holyfield, it was competitive, and he cut him. The Oliver McCall fight was reasonably close as well. These performance show if he was in his 30's, he would have likely won them.

Only stopped once in 75 fights, and that was happened when he was 38, out of the ring for almost 2 years and facing a prime Mike Tyson. Holmes beat plenty of big punchers.

At 6'3" tall with an 81" reach and a well-rounded arsenal and excellent speed, and a top level chin. Holmes unlike many of his predecessors sure could match up with the new version of super heavyweights. He would probably be 220 pounds today in shape.

• 
  3rd Party Accolades:

• [url]Boxing Writers Association of America[/url] [url]Fighter of the Year[/url] for 1978.
• [url]The Ring[/url] [url]Fighter of the Year[/url] for 1982.
• The Ring named Holmes the 5th [url]greatest heavyweight of all-time[/url] in 1998.
• The Associated Press named Holmes the 5th greatest heavyweight of the 20th century in 1999.

 

I have Holmes at 3, just ahead of Foreman, but even that's close. I have Ali at 1 and Joe Louis at 2.
If Larry had done all of beating Coetzee, Witherspoon in a rematch, Thomas, Page/Dokes and unifying, he might be my no. 2 behind only Ali.
It would be closer between Louis and Holmes at the least, imo. Ali's competition puts him clear.

I thought Larry might have done enough to win the second Spinks bout, but it's been a while since I've seen it. I'd have to watch that again to it to be clear in my mind.
Holmes was only stopped once in his long career and won still doing pretty well in the 90's into his forties. That means something. He had greater longevity than Ali and Louis.

So for me, he's 3 and Larry is up there as among the very best at heavyweight.