Is Larry Holmes

True, per The Ring anyways -

The Ring - May 1985
(as of March 14, 1985)

Heavyweight
World Champion:
Larry Holmes (IBF)
1. Pinklon Thomas (WBC)
2. Greg Page (WBA)
3. David Bey
4. Tim Witherspoon
5. Gerrie Coetzee
6. Mike Weaver
7. Michael Dokes
8. James Broad
9. Bonecrusher Smith
10. Gerry ****ey
11. Carl Williams
12. Tony Tubbs
13. Tony Tucker
14. Trevor Berbick
15. Marvis Frazier

 

In a climate where Weaver is threatened with being stripped if he fights his #1 contender RATHER than his #3 WBA contender and Holmes is forced to relinquish his WBC title just to peruse a fight with a rival champion (that fell through anyway) you think it's possible for for heavyweight titles to be unified??

These organizations were not rational when it came to heavyweights. The examples you gave of other unifications were not at heavyweight. In lighter weight classes it was lucrative to build interest in the division by staging unifications. The heavyweight division did not need building interest.

The mainstream public always knew what a heavyweight was. For generations people who did not watch boxing knew that Heavyweight champions apeared on postage stamps, milk cartons and such like.

In the 1980s the organisation's were happy to operate as if on seperate islands for as long as they could get away with it.

 

Pretty one sided isn't it.

 

:good

 

Politics and dirty shenanigans are every bit as bad in the lower divisions. In the early/mid-80s, all boxing's superstars were the smaller guys while the heavyweight division was considered moribund, so if anyone should have been "building interest" with unifications, it was the heavyweights. Holmes was not a household name and I never saw him on a milk carton or a stamp. That's why he had to accept the short end of the purse against Ali and 50-50 against C**ney. The Fab Four made money that dwarfed any of Holmes' purses outside of C**ney.

The bottom line is, for all the politics, the ABCs were happy enough to approve unifications in any division when the money, demand, interest etc was there for them. Think if C**ney had beaten Weaver for the WBA belt and then wanted to challenge Holmes for the unified title, the ABCs would have opted out of that bonanza?

 

I really wish that could have happened. C00ney was the WBA #1. in reality the WBA should have allowed Weaver to meet C00ney. They even signed too. It's about the craziest thing I ever heard that the WBA threatened to strip Weaver unless he took the #3 rather than #1 contender.

As you say, C00ney winning that would have forced the WBC into allowing Larry fight a unification with C00ney since Gerry had also been simultaneous WBC #1 as well. But who knows what those crazy organisations were capable of back then.

When you think of it the track record of the WBA was awful. They disregarded Norton or young as contenders, allowing Ali fight Spinks. They chose to disregard Holmes for inclusion of a vacant title match for their recognition upon Alis retirement. Chose Tate over Larry. Installed Coetzee as resident #1 WBA contender for no apparent reason after he lost to Tate, after he lost to Weaver and after he drew with Thomas. Forced weaver to fight his #3 over his #1 contender. Allowed Coetzee face a losing streak Page. Allowed Page to ignore an automatic rematch with Coetzee for their four minute round farce, Allowed Witherspoon to get out of an automatic rematch with Tubbs after he failed a drugs test.

And I dont think the WBC was much better. They just had a better more consistent champion.

It took the HBO serries to finally cut red tape in the heavyweight division. It had nothing much to do with Tyson.

 

Tubbs had just easily decisioned a still dangerous Page for the WBA title.

Larry had arguably lost to 15-0 Carl Williams

Thomas was in his absolute prime, having easily beaten Witherspoon in mid 1984.

Timing is everything in boxing.

Holmes was very vulnerable, and it proved true when Spinks beat him a few months later.

 

I tend to think Tyson would have unified the division with or without the HBO tournament. There was too much money and interest in him. There were heavyweight unifications before Holmes (Ali-Terrell, Frazier-Ellis) and after Holmes (Tyson). While he was champ there were light-heavyweight, welterweight and lightweight unifications, and a unified middleweight champion. You're essentially arguing that there was some obstacle that made heavyweight unifications impossible only between 1978 and 1985 (except 1984). I wonder what (or who) that obstacle could have been.

Arguing whether the WBA was worse than the WBC is like wondering whether syphilis is better than gonorrhoea. It was actually both orgs who allowed Ali to fight Spinks. The WBC stripped Spinks for giving Ali a rematch and handed a paper belt to Norton without even making him win it in the ring. They spent years allowing Holmes to face all those third rate challengers, including a clearly sick and ailing Ali, whilst only fighting their #1 contender twice in five years, and never ordered rematches after his numerous close/controversial wins. The IBF let Holmes defend against Smith and Williams, neither of whom was in their top ten, never ordered a rematch after the very unpopular Williams decision, and then Spinks, a career light-heavyweight.

 

Lots of revisionism being touted here by those who were probably not close to the game during that period. Hard for any champion to go right as there were constant threats of stripping titles if Champion A did not fight challenger C for one political body while the same threat would be coming from another. Holmes realized as the true and really only champion he was above all of these threats.

 

Choke probably wasn't around, but I know I was.

 

I was around. Never missed a magazine in the UK.

C00ney v Holmes was huge. Everything else by comparison was reported like they were "the other champion".

I remember how confusing it was. That did start to set in once there were three champions. People kept trying to predict who was going to take over from Holmes as he was considered the real champion, or closest to it.

The lost generation of tubby belt holders. It was disappointing when Thomas lost to Berbick because he was the only one that looked decent enough to take over. But Larry was more active.

Looking back now I think Larry's decision to unify actually created that extra belt. The confusion really started once there was three belts. It timed in with Larry getting older and the rivals getting fatter.

I was there.

 

Yes Larry's decision to dump his belt because he wanted to fight the unranked Marvis Frazier instead of his mandatories Page and Spoon had long-standing consequences for boxing, as it gave overnight credibility to the newly-formed IBF and suddenly we had three title belts in each division. Thanks for that Lar.

Thing is, Holmes and Coetzee beating the other still wouldn't have unified the division, as there was still the matter of the WBC belt Holmes had left his top two contenders to fight for. It took Holmes five years to show some interest in meeting a WBA champ. At that rate the millennium would have been approaching before he got around to another unification.

 

interesting that holmes gets slammed for "only" defending against #3 bey (and wins) when the other two champions thomas takes #14 berbick (and loses) and Page takes on #12 tony tubbs and loses as well.

 

Those rankings are for March 85. Thomas-Berbick was a year later. Berbick knocked out #3 Bey in June 85. Holmes' next defence was against #11, who beat him up, followed by a guy not even on that list, who beat him twice.