Joe Louis V larry holmes

Louis by decision or late KO. Holmes had trouble with Tyson's right. Granted Holmes was old and in active when he fought Tyson but I still think Louis might get to him late in the fight. Holmes gives Louis plenty of problems in the process though.

 

Bill he was up in the ratings at that time but he fought 2rds in 2 years and the inside boxing world knew he was being treating for cocaine and alchohal rehab along with his brother Tom...Cooney had the punchers chance for a 1 armed guy but was not as complete as Dokes,Page,Weaver,Thomas,Tate even one dimentional Coetzee...dont get me wrong I felt Holmes was the best talent and best consistantly conditioned fighter but the time to fight these guys is when they were on top, forget the excuses that they all eventually lost...this was the 80's and only Holmes,Weaver stayed in condition and away from drugs, still any of those fights would have been a draw because the other guys were known as co=champs, ex-champs or solid guys with power

 

Holmes was the main one managed to keep winning. Whenever he was going to fight someone more times than not they lost and fell short and Holmes fought the lucky (or unlucky depending how you look at it) guy who beat the other. When Holmes had his off nights he managed to overcome the hardships where as the others did not.

At the hall of fame weekend Cooney said nothing of the drugs before the Holmes fight, he said all of those problems came after because he couldn't bare to fail all of those people and the pressure beat him. That's one of the main reasons he looked so bad against Michael Spinks.

 

If you read what I said That is just about It in a nutshell

...dont get me wrong I felt Holmes was the best talent and best consistantly conditioned fighter but the time to fight these guys is when they were on top...this was the 80's and only Holmes,Weaver stayed in condition and away from drugs,

 

How in the hell were most of these guys more qualified than Cooney to get a shot at Holmes in the spring of 1982? John Tate lost to both Mike Weaver and Trevor Berbick in 1980 - two fighters that Holmes had either beaten or would soon beat. Tate would then fall off the face of the earth. Coetzee had since lost to both Tate and Weaver, and wasn't really doing much around 1981-1982. Weaver was taking a hiatus from the sport, due to injuries between 81-82, and had lost to Holmes earlier. Pinklon Thomas as of May 1982 ( one month before Holmes vs Cooney ), was a novice who had never been in the ring with a contender. Greg Page was getting his ass kicked by Trevor Berbick on the undercard of the Holmes - Cooney fight, and who's best win was a decision over Jimmy Young who Cooney had sparked a better version of in just 4 rounds, two years earlier. Dokes had a nice looking record, but hadn't beaten anyone of significant quality by that point, and in fact had barely decisioned Cobb, as well drew with Ocasio.

Gerry Cooney may have had his shortcummings as you pointed out, but most of his weaknesses, did not surface until AFTER Holmes had exposed him. At the time he was looking rather menacing at 6'7", 228 Lbs, and with a perfect record of 25-0-0-21. His wins over Young, Lyle and Norton came against past prime foes, but he had dusted them in frighteningly easy fashion. He was also not as one dimensional as you described him earlier. He had a respectable jab, okay footwork, a servicable hook, plenty of punching power, and was generally a fast starter. I can't think of anyone in the spring of 1982 who was more deserving of a title shot than Gerry Cooney, due to the circumstances that I described for the fighters that you listed.

 

To open this up a bit Cooney struggled like **** against Young and didn't actually spark him at all. If memory serves me a huge cut ended Jimmy's night when he was actually fighting very competitively.

On the Cooney's deserving his shot at the time you are spot on tho. He was considered the most dangerous contender in the division and many top experts actually picked him vs Holmes. On top of this it was the fight the people wanted to see. 100% valid title defense this one.

 

I might even spend a few hours on this one night and totally substanciate the lot from all sides with nothing but fact so peeps can make their own interpretations. I'll save it for future ref too.

 

I think people here put too much emphasis on the word ducked and speculate endlessely about why that fight or that fight didn't happen, who's fault it was, etc... For me that's not important when judging a fighters record. The only important facts are did the fight happen and how did it end.

Therefore it counts against a fighter if he, for whatever reason, didn't prove himself against the best fighters out there. I think this point can be made against both Louis and Holmes, but also Frazier, Foreman, Johnson (to some extent) and of course Dempsey.

 

Call it what you may, Lets not use the word duck but lets say Holmes missed out on Some very large paydays missing out on BIG fights such as HOLMES/WEAVERII Holmes/Page Holmes/Dokes Holmes/Coetzee Holmes/Tate Holmes/Thomas ....We can all use an example of say Calzage/Lacy or Calzage/Kessler,They were big fights in U.s. and Europe and in retrospect the Lacy fight was a mismatch but if the fight did not come off it would be an injustice to the fans...I can not think of any era where such good matchups in one weight class did not happen...ofcourse in the 90's a Lewis/Bowe match would have been Big and something the fans deserved....The Holmes era was not as magnified to the public as much as the Ali era but then again most of Ali fans were just that not Boxing fans (if you asked them who Duran or Olivares was they may not know) Still as a boxing fan the Holmes era bothered me because some good fights could and should have been made. I know a lot of people think I am attacking Holmes and are defending him. A lot of the fights may have been for reasons out of Larry's control but too many were just not made because of the risk level. As a fight fan I thought Tyson would have a punchers chance vs Lewis but I am glad I got to see it because if I did not I would be wondering Could Mike have pulled it off? I am glad that there were Champions like Lewis(who rematched McCall and Rahman) Marciano(who rematched Walcott,Charles and Lastarza, Ali who rematched Norton,Frazier and Cooper just to erase whatever doubts I may have had

 

This all seems very reasonable.