Is Larry Holmes

Regarding the ranking of Holmes' title opponents, here's something I posted in 2008:

Here's a look at Larry Holmes' opponents' Ring's Ratings from the "period ending" issue immediately before his defenses:

Evangelista (6)
Ocasio (5)
Weaver (eight)
Shavers (3)
Zanon (7)
Jones (6)

For these six fights Holmes was listed as Number 1 contender, first under Ali, then under "Title Vacant". After Weaver beat Tate, Holmes was given status as Champion as he'd already beaten new WBA champ Weaver.

LeDoux (10)
Ali (5)
Berbick (7)
Spinks (3)
Snipes (10)
****ey (3)
Cobb (9)
Rodriguez (unranked)
Witherspoon (10)
Frank (unranked)
Frazier (10)
Smith (9)
Bey (3)
Williams (12)
Spinks (Lt. Heavy champ)

Regarding Holmes' lack of defenses against top Ring Magazine contenders, I look at it like this: For my own historical information, I use the Ring rankings for comparison rather than rankings from the organizations. I feel that they are a better indicator of contenders' actual abilities. That said, I understand that Holmes and other organizational champs had to defend their titles based on organizational ratings. At that time Holmes was not fighting WBA (or later, WBC) titleholders to unify the belts, for various reasons. (I do partially blame Holmes for this, along with Don King and the governing bodies).

It's really too bad that these organizational fractions had to happen. It could have been a really really nice era had Holmes defended against Dokes, Coetzee, Page and Thomas.

 

He could have fought most of those guys at some point even without organizational fractions. They were non-champions, but top 10 guys at some point during Holmes' WBC reign.

I bolded the post ****ey '82 - 85 time period to really show where his worst cherry picking occurred. The Ring rankings you show next to the names of the guys he fought in that time period show just how much he cherry picked.

 

How could he? Those guys had mandatory demands of their own that they kept losing. Their governing body would not have Holmes in their ratings so he did not represent a mandatory challenger to them and nor did they to him. Not until HBO came in and got them to waive the individual mandatory defences in order for unifications to take place was it possible for them to occur.

What about the credentials of the other guys though? What did Tubbs and Dokes ever do to get title shots? Dokes beat John L Gardener. Tubbs beat Smith who lost his last fight. Coetzee failed twice to win a title finally beats Dokes then loses to a challenger who not only failed already to win a title but had lost his last two fights! Witherspoon is granted a vacant title chance because he could lose to Holmes and beat Tillis. Everybody beat Tillis. Thomas gets a shot at Witherspoon from a draw then loses to Berbick. Weaver challenged Thomas after being knocked out by Tony Anthony after the bell. Spoon beats Tubbs but fails a drug test...

If a guy could not beat Holmes he could always try and win the other belt. It was an alternative to being champion.

 

The thread has gone off topic but....

This has been done to death in here. It's no secret Holmes took the easy path post C00ney, he openly stated it in interviews himself during the time.

He was always bitter at the establishment and felt hard done by left right and center. He felt he was entitled to take the easy route on the way down, stating he had fought all the hard guys and earned it.

He certainly backed this up with his actions, fighting loads of stiffs and unworthy contenders.

The most dangerous fighters were avoided, Page, Thomas, Witherspoon etc. People can say this one kept getting beat or that one but the truth is Holmes wasn't going to fight them, he told us. At one stage the scene was set for a juicy confrontation with Thomas but he flat out refused. Witherspoon won his next 3 fights after his surprising showing against Larry so the opportunity was there for a quick rematch given some scored it a draw and some even scored for Tim, he and Page were set etc etc. He knew he was going downhill and was determined to go out on his own terms - taking it easy and winning.

How each individual takes these facts on board in rating Larry is entirely up to them and their criteria.

Some will say well he's not much of a true champion, others will say well i think he would have beat them all anyways etc etc.

I still have him around 4-6 (from memory) on my all time heavyweight list, one spot ahead of Lewis i think.

If Larry took on another two or three of these guys, say Page, Thomas and a Spoon rematch and won all i'd maybe move him up a spot or two. I still rate him very very highly obviously.

 

Good post. I remember some of us old timers having this same debate on a seemingly weekly basis circa 2007-2008. It was one of the hotter and more controversial topics at the time. I confess having gone through great lengths to defend Holmes' actions as champion and then toning down to a more middle of the road view.. He fought some excellent fighters and many others who far FROM excellent. Dropped a title, avoided some top dogs and had some close and iffy decisions. Overall I still rank him around 4-5... Reaching 48-0 is hard regardless of who you fight, let alone young undefeated contenders, even if they aren't the best. I guess Holmes will always be controversial in that way.

 

Ratings are a snapshot in time. Obviously, Witherspoon a 3-time heavyweight champion was better than 10th, and the Holmes fight was likely his best performance.

Similarly, Bey rank of #3 was mainly off beating an inconsistent Page and he was never really that good.

Some of Holmes best wins vs Norton and Shavers 2x were not listed, nor was Roy Tiger Willaims. I'd put all three men in Holmes best ten wins.

Dokes wasn't an option for Holmes due to Politics, but Page for a small window 1.5-2 years was until he lost to Bey. IMO, Holmes would have beaten Page in 1984 or 1985.

 

I agree. For years I thought Holmes was taking a liberty with some of those fights, dropping the WBC belt etc, but study the records of the top ten, study the policy of governing body's and study the actual time line and ratings. It's not all Larry's fault. Nobody but Holmes deserved to rate higher than #3. The rival champs did not earn #1 because they did not beat #1 contenders. Policy at the time was to rate belt holders above contenders just because they were belt holders, but they were really the same thing as a contender.

 

Extra fights against no hopers. The others could have extended their reigns for years too had they ignored the best challengers and padded their records.

I said Spoon was a rookie, and he was. He'd had 15 pro fights and a few amateur bouts. Snipes was his only win against a recognizable contender. What fighters can you think of who were at their best after 15 fights?

Yes Page would beat Cobb. Who did Cobb ever beat? He was 3-2 in his five fights before Holmes, got beaten by a decrepit Norton and Dokes, the same guy you claim didn't deserve a shot at Holmes. Strange that Dokes beating Cobb proves he wasn't deserving, but Cobb losing to Dokes proves he was!

The WBC. The one you were earlier claiming was the most legitimate belt. Page's loss to Berbick was 18 months earlier. Did Spoon lose to Holmes? Certainly Holmes didn't look the superior fighter that night.

What does that have to do with anything? While a guy Holmes had barely squeaked past was taking on the #1 contender whom Holmes ducked, Holmes was fighting Frank and Frazier. Indefensible.

Coetzee beat Dokes, who was better than anyone C**ney actually beat. Would C**ney's rep have ever been risked against someone like Coetzee? Considering he was lining up a washed up Joe Bugner as his last fight prior to Holmes, I suspect not.

Tate was better than Cobb, Mercado, Stander and Stallings, who all beat Shavers. Shavers had problems with good and not so good fighters all through his career, could be out-boxed and KO'd at any point in his career, and it didn't take an ATG to do it.

Holmes fought Bey because it was a winnable fight against another neophyte heavyweight. And let's face it the Bey of Pigs hardly set the world alight against Page. Page cut him up pretty badly and arguably deserved the decision. If beating Page was such a big deal (even though, according to you, Page was never much good anyway) and enough to earn Bey a shot at Holmes, why didn't Holmes fight Spoon, who beat Page first in a more important fight?

Do you think if Page had drawn with Snipes like Frank did, it would have improved his chances of fighting Holmes?

How could Holmes be top man when he never beat the other top men? He hardly ever fought someone rated in the top 3, whether in the Ring's ratings or the ABC's. If they inherited their #1 status then so did Holmes. He somehow held onto his top ranking no matter how weak and unqualified many of his challengers were, and no matter how rarely he fought the best in the division.

If the Ring really wanted to clean up the division, why would they be rating the holders of a "bogus" title as their #1 contender? It makes no sense. No, it was because these guys were considered the best in the division. The Ring only ranked Holmes as the champion because a guy he beat unexpectedly won the WBA title a year later (why would they take any notice of someone who won a "bogus" title?). It was completely arbitrary since Weaver was not considered anywhere near the best in the division when Holmes fought him. Had Tate held on for another minute, Holmes would not have been the Ring champion.

It's telling that you have to go back to the previous decade to find a few #1s that Holmes fought! Norton doesn't count because he was champion at the time, not Holmes. When Norton was Holmes' #1 contender, Holmes didn't fight him. The WBA champions only occupied the top spot. What prevented Holmes facing the #2 and #3 guys? Even if you go by the WBC's ratings (the ones that actually mattered since they controlled the title), Holmes wasn't meeting many of their top challengers either. His last mandatory defence for the WBC was C**ney in 82.

Snipes lost to Witherspoon and Page. Snipes only got his shot at Holmes thanks to a gift decision against Coetzee (you know, another guy who wasn't that good and never deserved a fight with Holmes). They managed to beat him without almost being knocked senseless like Holmes was! How could he be better?

Shavers has been covered above. If Earnie could lose to a Bob Stallings or a Ron Stander, then he could certainly lose to any of them.

C**ney never showed he was better than those guys. He never fought any of them or any other live contenders. Before their fight Holmes said the only reason C**ney was ranked was because he was white.

Leon? Surely you jest! He didn't last a round with Coetzee. Better than Thomas, Page, Dokes? No chance. His only win over note post-Ali was Mercado, who had already been KO'd by a 12-0 Tate.

Williams got KO'd by Weaver in two rounds shortly after losing a very controversial split to Holmes.

15-0 Spoon, 14-1 Bonecrusher and 19-8 Weaver were not better than the above when they fought Holmes.

Who was better in 78-79, Norton/Tate or Evangelista/Ocasio? Who did Holmes fight?

Who was better in 80-82, Coetzee/Weaver or Zanon/Jones/LeDoux/Berbick? Who did Holmes fight?

Who was better in 82-83, Dokes or Cobb/Rogriguez? Who did Holmes fight?

Who was better in 83, Page or Frank/Frazier? Who did Holmes fight?

Who was better in 84-85, Spoon/Thomas or Smith/Bey/Williams/Spinks in 84-85? Who did Holmes fight?

Thomas, Page, Dokes and Coetzee all had long spells near the top of the rankings, held a portion of the title and the first three in particular had the style to cause Holmes lots of problems. All were talented fighters with good records. There was a point in time when they were highly regarded and considered one of if not the best in the division, and in each case Holmes preferred to face less deserving, less dangerous fighters. Arguing that they was no threat or undeserving because at some point they lost to someone Holmes beat is meaningless without context. Boxing doesn't work that way. If A beats B who then beats C, it doesn't follow that A is better than C.

When the champ ignores the best men in the division, refuses to rematch tough opponents, leaving them to face each other while he fights mostly soft touches, of course they're all going to suffer defeats while he stays unbeaten and reigns for years. Spoon and Thomas could have reigned for years if they ignored all the best fighters and tackled Holmes' Euro murderers' row instead.

Had Holmes faced Coetzee, Dokes, Page and Thomas and had rematches with Weaver, Witherspoon, Williams and Norton instead of Zanon, LeDoux, Frank, Evangelista, Rodriguez, Marvis, Cobb and the rest, would he have stayed unbeaten? Considering nearly every good fighter he faced gave him hell, some almost KO'd him, others he needed the benefit of every doubt from the officials, why couldn't more experienced and more accomplished fighters do better? Holmes obviously didn't want to find out, which is why several of the best heavyweights who were active during his reign are absent from his record.

 

Come on and tell us the truth, Larry nailed your wife, right ? One crazy final paragraph. :nut

 

I remember you steadfastly backed Holmes at the start, but when facts came to light you showed an open mind and found the middle road. You are well qualified on the topic, absolutely.

 

Did Greg Page nail your wife? Fine if you want to pretend that Zanon, Rodriguez, LeDoux and co were better fighters than Page, Thomas and Dokes, but a lot of people then and now didn't think so, and that's why Holmes gets called out on it.

 

Norton was better than Tate. Perhaps Tate beats Evangelista but that's 50-50 fight. What makes Tate better than Occasio? Tate was knocked out in his prime by a guy who drew with a prime Occasio. So Larry Holmes is the best heavyweight that year.

weaver was better than Coetzee. Jones beat Weaver. Berbick beat the guy that knocked out Weaver and Holmes knocked out Snipes and annihilated Berbick and Jones So yes Holmes was the best over that period.

Holmes also fought C00ney and Witherspoon as well during this period whilst Dokes drew with Weaver and Coetzee drew with Thomas. Dokes beating John L Gardener did not make Dokes challenging for a title much more outstanding on paper than Rodriguez was challenging Holmes. At least Witherspoon had beat Snipes!

I would say Witherspoon was better in 1983 than Frank and Frazier since he beat Page. He lost to Holmes ten months earlier, still 1983, so in answer to your question Holmes was still best in 1983.

In 1984 Thomas had one fight, he matched what Holmes did with one of three defences the previous year. Holmes had one fight too, he stops Smith. Witherspoon went 1-1. So yes Thomas looks as good as Holmes for one year. What happens in 1985? Holmes beats Williams and Bey who on paper are better than The one fight Thomas has with Weaver. Then both Holmes and Thomas get beat in their next fight so 1985, Spinks is the best.

What I want to know was when Page loses to Bey then beats Coetzee on the rebound and Holmes beat Bey why didn't Page then challenge Holmes to prove his loss to Bey had been a fluke? Why then did page lose instead to a kid whos only credentials was beating the last guy Holmes beat?

presumably Holmes would have stayed unbeaten because he was able to beat guys right after or right before that they lost to. Weaver and Berbick both beat Tate. Larry beat Weaver before Tate lost to him and Larry beat Berbick right after Berbick knocked him out. Berbick, Bey and Witherspoon did the same to page. Even Thomas blew his title to Berbick. Even Snipes beat Berbick! Snipes and weaver both beat Coetzee before he was champion. Then there's Tubbs losing to Witherspoon, Smith beating Witherspoon and Weaver. Dokes drew with Occasio and went life and death with Cobb. I'm starting to wonder if those guys are not 50-50 for Marvis Frazier!

 

we agree! They were regular contenders that's all they were. No better and no greater than guys Holmes beat. Most were good for one fight.

Larry did not fight ten guys as good as Tate and co? Of course he did. There are wins on his record against guys not as good for sure, but along side those are at least ten wins over men equal to Tate, Tubbs, Dokes, Thomas and Page were in credentials when those guys landed fights for the other belt. Absolutely.

heights Tate rose to? What was Tates red hot win that ******ted a vacant title shot? Beating Dwayne Bobick?? Is that it? Would that have been enough to challenge Holmes? What height had Weaver rose to losing to Holmes? Was that really enough to challenge Tate with? Coetzee already lost to Tate did matching Tates one win project Weaver above and beyond what Holmes did rounding up Shavers, Ali, Norton and Jimmy Youngs Victor and beating them?

Don't get me started on Dokes.

Dokes promised much but delivered nothing more than Leroy Jones before challenging Weaver. Was Dokes ever better than Weaver if he could lose to Coetzee? Was Coetzee any better than David Bey?

certainly page could reach heights higher than Frank, I would certainly like to think so. I won't dispute that. But C00ney always represented a greater threat. C00ney eclipsed Page. C00neywas always rated higher than Dokes when both were contenders. Page as a threat was no more significant than Snipes or Witherspoon or Berbick.

Witherspoon looked excellent. He sure did. He sure did not win that fight with Larry though, and he sure did not look as good again. Tommy Farr fought a good fight versus Joe Louis, he did not get a rematch. Godoy did not get an instant rematch either.

Thomas at least looked the genuine second best to Holmes for one year and this would have been more than the others achieved. Thomas matched Larry with the Witherspoon win but I think, personally, that Smith, Bey and Williams were better opponents than Weaver who had done less than Bey had in his previous fight. And I tell you why, Bey had recently beat current champion Page. Before they met, Williams looked a fresher more exciting challenger in 1985 than weaver. Weaver was old hat by then in comparison. Tony Anthony knocked him out in his last fight after the bell. Only with hindsight do we now know Weaver had a surprises win left in him and that goes for Bonecrusher Smith too!

Thomas and Larry both lost their title around the same time too.

What about Micheal Dokes? Dokes took two attempts to beat Occasio, drew to the one decent guy he scored a win over, lost to the guy the last two champs beat. Yes Dokes was some guy.

it does not take a mind reader to work out it was impossible to excuse the inconsistencies of the rival champions or the irrational demands of the governing bodies.

Pinklon says he would fight Holmes "at the drop of a hat" but he sat inactive for a lot longer than Larry did before fighting a contender who was "old hat".

you think Witherspoon and Holmes should rematch within a ten month window before Tim fought Page? Why couldn't Larry take two quick voluntary fights first? Ali had voluntary fights, Louis had voluntary fights. It was not long enough from folks minds that Berbick beat Page and Berbick himself had since lost to Snipes. So all Page was is a guy who can't beat Berbick. Snipes beat Berbick. The three guys Berbick, Snipes and Page are still one level bellow championship.

Larry had beat 6 of the ten. Dokes and Weaver were tied up in a rematch and Coetzee was preserving his relationship as resident contender with the WBA barely treading water and getting a draw with a prospect. Tillis, Snipes and Berbick began to lose fights too. It left Cobb and Witherspoon as it happened. Holmes was limited to who he could fight.

So how come Snipes beat Berbick? How come Snipes beat Coetzee? How come Snipes almost beat Witherspoon?

I meant Bey but what's the difference between Tubbs and Bey? Hair? They both wore a moustache and full sized breasts.

-And they both beat Page.

Yes Holmes fought Frank and Rodriguez. Who were lousy. But it was not at the expense of better fighters because Larry was more active and within those sorry mismatches he did beat challengers considered more significant at the time like Shavers, C00ney, Bey, Leon, Ali, Cobb, Jones, Snipes even Marvis As well as Smith, Weaver, Berbick and Witherspoon before they became champions.