To put it bluntly, you have nothing remotely resembling evidence that is commensurate to the boldness of that claim. What is supposed to have happened after 1930 that so drastically -and so incontrovertibly- improved the quality of heavyweight fighters? One highly underrecognized bias, which as far as I'm aware doesn't even have a name, is what I call "iconoclasm bias", in which the mere fact that a proposition may be unpalatable somehow increases the likelihood that the person arguing for it is "just being real". You know, bias flows equally freely in all directions. That's why it's so hard to think well. An attempt to correct a genuine bias is extremely prone to overcompensation, simply supplanting one bias with another.
I agree McVey. The Holmes jab was fast and powerful. And Larry could hit with power. If boxer/puncher Bill Brennan gave Dempsey a tough fight, Holmes would definitely be a nightmare for Dempsey.
Well under 200 lbers the ones I give a reasonable chance to upset prime Holmes are the following Ezzard Charles Cruiser version of Evander Holyfield Jersey Joe Walcott Roy Jones, Jr (who beat Ruiz) Rocky Marciano To a lesser extent Billy Conn Floyd Patterson Eddie Machen Ring Magazine had Walcott vs Holmes as one of their greatest fights of all time that never happened. Unfortunately I cannot include Primo Carnera or Fred Fulton as they are over 200 pounds.
I don't agree with that statement,nor do I agree that Baer is either a modern heavyweight, or that he is an ATG.
