Is Larry Holmes

:good

It's a pity any champion never gets to fight ALL of the contenders without there being a multi championship culture. But it's more of a pity if there already is a twin championship culture going on.

From a challengers point of view with more championships most of the real top ten will get a title opportunity even though they may not be any better than the hordes of contenders of previous eras who never got a sniff of championship action.

It's safe to say none of Holmes rival belt holders had what it took to keep and succsesfully defend their belt against the challengers Larry did meet in the way Holmes did.

This is why history really should only remember Tate and co as a contender in actual terms, which is how Ring Magazine has if you look at the annual ratings. Holmes was champion and everybody else was a contender. Some passed a belt among each other. That's the reality.

That's why I feel it's almost an injustice to call Tubbs a champion but not somebody just as good like say Carl Williams or Renaldo Snipes or for that matter Eddie Machen, Arturo Godoy or Harry Wills.

 

So here is cagey veteran Trever Berbick, three fights after being a novice against Larry Homes, thrashing Greg Page on the Holmes ****ey undercard .. two of three judges had it 98 - 92 Berbick .. Page was beaten up .. serves him right for fighting such a veteran .. LOL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N09l_Me-CAY

 

And to think between that June 1982 night that Holmes and Page fought on the same night (page losing to Berbick) and November 1983 Holmes fought 5 times. Page fought four times. Holmes did have soft touches like Rodriguez and Frank within the 5 but also dealt with Cobb and Witherspoon who were rated name guys that had not just been knocked out like the faded Tillis who Page beat, the only remotely decent win out of the four wins he had over the same time frame that somehow made Page this red hot #1 contender?

To think all page had to do after losing his #4 WBC rating to Berbick was beat faded Tillis (who was a knockout victim in his last fight) and outpoint Snipes who was 1-1-1 himself since losing to Holmes!!! Why does that make Page #1?

No wonder Holmes felt like he was entitled to a quick extra fight with Marvis. When your looking for 5 fights in that time frame I'm not surprised Holmes was looking outside the top ten just to stay busy. Look at the ten during that time and what each contender got up to between the time Holmes fought C00ney and Marvis between June 82 and November 83':

Larry Holmes
1. Mike Weaver (gets knocked out by Dokes in December, draws the rematch in May 83)
2. Michael Dokes ( Weaver x2 then loses to Coetzee in September)
3. Gerry ****ey (Larry just beat him)
4. Greg Page (lost to Berbick, beats Tillis who just lost and 1-1-1 Snipes)
5. Gerrie Coetzee (treading water with a draw against Thomas then gets a shot at Dokes)
6. Trevor Berbick (Holmes beat him April 81. He beats Page but loses to Snipes and s.t. Gordon)
7. James ‘Quick’ Tillis (already beat by Weaver goes and loses to Thomas, Page, Witherspoon)
8. Randall ‘Tex’ Cobb (Holmes beat him in November)
9. Tim Witherspoon (Holmes beats him May 83 after Tim beats Snipes)
10. Renaldo Snipes[Holmes beat him Nov 81 then he goes 1-1-1 until meeting Page)

Let's not forget Larry beat 6 of this top ten to begin with.
In this time frame the WBA title goes through Weaver, Dokes and Coetzee. How many of the top ten has Coetzee beat?

 

Berbick had 61 career fights, Witherspoon had 69, Page had 76. Are you going to tell me these guys all peaked before their 20th bout? Berbick beat a Tate on the downslide and never contended for anything again. Page was 19-0 when he lost to Berbick. His biggest win at that point was an old Jimmy Young. Remind me what Holmes was doing when he was 19-0? Oh that's right he was fighting the legendary Joe Gholston (record 15-9-2).

After losing to Berbick, Page KO'd Tillis and won an eliminator against Snipes. He was the WBC's #1 contender, Holmes was ordered to face him and chose to ditch his belt and face Frank and Frazier instead. That's indisputable. Were they more deserving than Page? Were they higher ranked than Page? Did they have better wins than Page? No, no and no. So your arguments against Page are moot when clearly you didn't have to be deserving, highly ranked or on a long unbeaten streak to get a shot at Holmes.

So because Holmes had been champ for five years he had carte blanche to milk the title and fight whoever he wanted? Nonsense. Holmes was hardly revolting against the ABCs when he helped another one establish itself. More like he was revolting against them forcing him to meet his top ranked challengers. His last mandatory defence was C**ney in June 82. That's why he switched to the IBF, who were so grateful for his defection they were happy to sanction his fights against lowly ranked and undeserving opposition.

I keep hearing that Page/Dokes/Coetzee didn't deserve to fight Holmes because they didn't do this or that, or should have done something else. Where that argument falls down is when you apply the same criteria to the men who actually did get a shot at Holmes. What had Rodriguez, Zanon, Cobb, LeDoux, Evangelista, Marvis, Jones, Frank et al had done? The answer is a lot less than those guys. They were not bigger fights, they were not more deserving and they were not more dangerous. So why did the above have to jump through hoops?

 

I agree with all the above.. There were definitely more deserving challengers during Holmes reign than a lot of the garbage wagon crew that he fought. It should be pointed out however that he did sign to fight Coetzee and it was "Coetzee's" people who backed out.. Not Holmes.. The Dokes fight was never going to happen because the two of them were both handled under the same promotional umbrella of Don King Productions, and Dokes was actually being groomed to be Holmes' replacement.. Of course by the time Holmes parted ways with King in 1983 and chose to go his own way, Dokes had lost to Coetzee and ended up taking time off from the ring. Hence their careers never crossed paths again..But I agree... Greg Page and Pinklon Thomas should have gotten fights with Larry. And Weaver and Witherspoon should have gotten rematches. The fact that Lucien Rodriguez, Marvis Frazier, Scott Frank, James Smith, Carl Williams and David Bey got title shots between 1983-1985 ahead of at least 3-4 other qualified challengers during that time frame is a travesty.

 

Holmes beat six of the top ten but only two of the top five. Weaver was nowhere near #1 when he fought Holmes. Ironically, Holmes would have ignored Weaver a year later when he had a title and actually was highly ranked. Just like he ignored Spoon after the 15-0 rookie unexpectedly gave him a hard fight and subsequently won a title.

Going by the Ring's ratings, Holmes never fought a #1 or #2 ranked contender (at the time of the fight) and only three #3s, which is pretty underwhelming for a highly touted seven year reign. As I said, you can't give him retrospective credit for beating guys who went on to have successful careers and win titles when they were considered soft touches at the time.

 

spot on

You and I obviously followed boxing closely in the 83-85 time frame. KO Mag. ****yzed the Holmes situation with King and the WBC and came to the same conclusion as you.

 

I agree with a lot of what you've been saying on this thread. But there are two problems with going by ring ratings, especially if you're looking at the " annual" list of ratings.

1. The ring annual ratings don't reflect what these guys were ranked on a month to month basis or at the exact time Holmes defended his title

2. While I don't typically agree with Alphabet ratings as I believe them to be corrupt, THOSE are the ones he had to defend his belt accordingly to, because THOSE are the organizations who's title(s) he held.. Not Ring's... That said of course, he was rightfully stripped by the WBC for failing to meet Greg Page.. But it had nothing to do with Ring..

 

Those are the Ring's monthly ratings, ie the issue before the fight took place, not the annual ones. The Ring isn't perfect at all, I agree, and they aren't the be all and end all. They are at least a guideline as to how fighters were regarded at the time.

 

Then I am 100% in concurrence with you on the issue. Larry Holmes will always be a great champion to me, but he side stepped too many qualified contenders for the issue to go unaddressed.

 

Good post.

 

Tillis wasn't badly faded when Page beat him

He gave Thomas a very competitive fight before gassing in Aug. 1982. Also, in June 1982, he easily beat Shavers, who was faded, but did KO Joe Bugner later in 1982, the same Joe Bugner you claimed was a top 10 contender when Marvis Frazier beat him in 1983. Tillis also gave Weaver a competitive fight less than a year before fighting Page. Tillis was fighting top flight competition, only losing to elite guys.

Also, Snipes had beaten Trevor Berbick in late 1982. So Page beat the man who beat him. That counts for something.

You totally left off Pinklon Thomas, who was another guy Holmes wanted no part of.

At least Coetzee and Tillis fought him. Coetzee's draw with Thomas was enough to certify him as a viable contender. I do think, though, that he caught Dokes at the perfect time. Dokes was having drug problems, and because of that, was not realizing his potential.

Page then kod Coetzee, after losing to Witherspoon and losing a questionable decision to Bey. Holmes did beat Bey in 1985, but his only claim to fame was that questionable decision over Page. He was an easier opponent than Coetzee or Witherspoon would have been in 1984, or Page would have been in 1983.

 

Larry Holmes
1. Mike Weaver (gets knocked out by Dokes in December, draws the rematch in May 83)
2. Michael Dokes ( Weaver x2 then loses to Coetzee in September)
3. Gerry ****ey (Larry just beat him)
4. Greg Page (lost to Berbick, beats Tillis who just lost and 1-1-1 Snipes)
5. Gerrie Coetzee (treading water with a draw against Thomas then gets a shot at Dokes)
6. Trevor Berbick (Holmes beat him April 81. He beats Page but loses to Snipes and s.t. Gordon)
7. James ‘Quick’ Tillis (already beat by Weaver goes and loses to Thomas, Page, Witherspoon)
8. Randall ‘Tex’ Cobb (Holmes beat him in November)
9. Tim Witherspoon (Holmes beats him May 83 after Tim beats Snipes)
10. Renaldo Snipes[Holmes beat him Nov 81 then he goes 1-1-1 until meeting Page).

That was the Ring ratings when Holmes fought ****ey and Page lost to Berbick.

why would he? He was prepared to meet the winner of Norton v Shavers.

when Holmes beat Witherspoon, Tim had already beat the same guy Page did to make #1 WBC contender in Snipes. 15-0 or not Tim was as qualified beating Snipes as Page was beating Snipes. Once Tim had the belt he had to fight Thomas. At least Holmes tried to get the Coetzee fight.

And why was that?? Was it because the Ring Automatically rated belt holders #1 contender to Larry? Yes it was. I've told you this time and time again. These #1 to Larry guys did not beat #1 Ring Magazine contenders to win that spot did they? Coetzee was not Ring #1 when he fought Tate, Tate was not Ring #1 either, Weaver was not Ring #1 when he challenged, Dokes was not Ring#1 when he challenged, page was not Ring#1, Tubbs was not Ring #1, Thomas was not Ring #1 when he challenged.
Berbick? Was Berbick #1 to anybody? Smith was he #1 when he beat Witherspoon? Bruno #1 with Ring Magazine when he challenged Tim? And soit goes on.

how many #1 contenders did Jack Dempsey or Jack Johnson beat in seven years?

#3 with The Ring was actually as high as a challenger as Holmes could get BECAUSE the WBC and WBA were at odds with each other. One not rating the other champion as a mandatory and making seperate mandatory demands that prevented unification. The WBA guys could not win fights at that level. They never beat a #1 Ring rated contender and lost to the next guy.

You dont have to give him retrospective credit. The championship was diluted. He still wound up with the best wins of that era. Larry beat ten guys as good as Tubbs, Page, Tate, Dokes, Thomas and those guys were lucky if they could record one win each at that level. Yes it's a pity politics did not allow those fights but each of them were (with hindsight) no better than ten guys Holmes did beat.

 

So, Holmes had only beaten two of that top 5, and his win over Weaver was when Mike was a nobody. That's not terribly impressive.

And then squeeze in defences against Zanon, Jones, LeDoux etc.

But if beating Snipes made Spoon deserving then surely Page was deserving too. If you want to quibble with the rankings, you can't simultaneously build up people like Cobb and Baby Spoon for being "rated" (in the bottom half of the top ten) but dismiss Page's rating.

So #2 ranked Witherspoon beat #1 ranked Page, and followed up by facing unbeaten highly touted #3 ranked Thomas. Meanwhile Holmes was fighting Frazier and Frank and then the IBF's #11 Bonecrusher. You have to admit that doesn't reflect well on Holmes.

The Ring were rating the WBA champions as #1 because generally they were considered the top fighters in the division. Ergo, Holmes was not meeting the top men in the division. The #1, #2 and #3 contenders can't all have been WBA champion at the same time, could they? Earlier you were bigging up the Ring for considering the WBA belt was a bogus title, and now all of a sudden they're automatically rating the WBA champions as #1?

Not many, and both get taken to task for it.

Then he still wasn't meeting the best contenders, because in seven years he fought four men ranked #3 (I mistakenly said three earlier). 16 were rated #5 or lower, and eight of those were #8 or lower. Did he ever meet what was considered the best man in the division?

During his title reign? Holmes never beat ten fighters as good as them. Not even close.

 

just extra fights. So what? The other guys could have had more fights too.

if beating Snipes made Spoon deserving then surely Page was deserving too? You said Tim was a 15-0 nobody what does that make Page after beating the same guy? He still lost to Berbick. Yes in retrospect page was as good as anyone but so what?? They're all the same! He had not proved to be better than anyone else and Bey and Witherspoon proved it!

seriously, would you put much money on Page beating Cobb? Greg could and did lose every second fight he had at world level.

by who? Witherspoon and Page both beat losing challengers Tillis and Snipes. That makes them #2 after they already lost to Berbick and Holmes? Another example of nobody being able to win fights at world level.

yes Larry got a mandatory when he beat Shavers, Occasio, Spinks and C00ney. Witherspoon got one mandatory and he blew it just like Tubbs did against him. Coetzee and Tate both lost in voluntary defences.

or because they just wanted to see a unification. Was Coetzee really better than ****ey? Was Tate better than Shavers? Was Page better than Bey? Each year Holmes proberbly beat one guy as good as the other champion lost to. And he tried to fight Ali to unify, he tried to fight Coetzee to unify, Dokes was tied to Weaver. And Larry fought Bey because Page could not beat him. Yes he turned his back on the WBC but Page was no more outstanding than Witherspoon had been beating Renaldo Snipes so his #1 ranking for beating the same Snipes was bullish!t. what made Snipes such a gate keeper after he drew with Frank!

Larry was the only top man! He could not meet himself! Who was the next best? Seriously? It's impossible to work out when no challenger to the WBA belt beat a top man in the division before challenging but inherited #1 status on winning regardless!!

The Ring installed Larry as the real champion in 1980. They wanted unification so the WBA guy was never credited with being "champion" simply contender. They listed them at #1 for no other reason than they wanted the whole thing cleared up not really because they stood out anymore than the rest of the top ten. but what a magazine wants and what the fans wanted is not what the promoter or the governing bodies wanted.

he could not meet himself could he? #1 was always a guy with a belt that was not allowed to fight Holmes. Shavers was the #1 when he knocked out Norton. Norton was #1 when he beat Young. After that the bogus belt holder took the #1 spot even though neither of them had won a genuine eliminator or beat anyone ranked higher than #4.

Holmes did not beat ten fighters at least as good as Tate, Dokes, Page, Tubbs and Thomas?

How about these guys??

Norton
Shavers
Weaver
Spinks
Snipes
****ey
Berbick
Witherspoon
Bey
Smith
WIlliams

That's eleven and you could almost add Marvis Frazier and Cobb and others. On any given night all these guys could lose to one another. They are all the same level. You might not like Holmes but you can't argue with his wins.


Was Thomas better than Berbick?
Was Page better than Bey?
Was Dokes really much better than Weaver, Cobb or Ocassio?
Was Tate better than Weaver or Berbick?
Was Coetzee better than Weaver or Snipes?

Apart from Tyson and Holmes 99% of the 1980s guys were no better than Renaldo Snipes. They really were not.