Larry Holmes defenses-help me here

I see where you are coming from but the actual sanctioning bodies and the political situation got in the way. A huge mistake was the WBA not supporting Holmes after Ali retired. Why pick John Tate to face Coetzee for their vacent recognition when Holmes already beat shavers and Norton? It should have been Holmes v Coetzee for their half of championship recognition. Gerry beating Leon put Coetzee in line for a shot. There was no need for two champs! Had Larry been undisputed all that time he would have had to face the strongest challengers because they had no other option. Having two champs meant two options for the challenger. Holmes or the guy who can't keep winning.

A lot of the time Larry was just keeping busy with these fights in the hope of building showdowns with the better guys but the so called better guys just could not keep winning.

I think Ocassio was some kind of mandatory because Young barely lost to Norton who wound up with the WBC strap out of it and Ocassio went and beat him twice in upsets.

Leon had that win over Mercado he looked okay at that point.

I wish Larry was the full champion and fought Tate, Dokes, Coetzee and Page in defence of an undisputed title but maybe he still would gave missed out? Maybe with one champion a lot of those guys might have had to lose to one another in eliminators trying to climb over one another?

I don't think Dokes, Tate and Tubbs had very strong resumes for being a challenger to a title but they wound up winning belts because the champ was no better either. Was Thomas's record any better on paper going into his WBC challenge than Snipes or Cobb or Berbick? I don't think so. Who had Tate, Tubbs and Dokes actually beat before fighting for titles?

Larry did not help himself with some of his comments about other champions but if those guys kept winning he would have had to fight them.

I think with so much talent around with two belts Don King could promote two champions. I think that was all that period was about.

 

I think he is part way responsible but not entirely. It looks like a lot of names but the Cooney and Ali fights were bigger and that kind of got in the way of a Weaver rematch. Dokes was committed to a Weaver rematch, who was Dokes before beating weaver anyway? Coetzee Larry did sign to meet. Thomas was out with a bad eye but really wanted Holmes but Holmes took Bey because he beat Page. Thomas proberbly was somewhat of a Duck. Page was due a shot about the time of Cooney. By the time Larry was stripped for not meeting Page I don't think Page looked good enough to fight him anyway. Page went off the boil after 1983.

It is a lot if names but it was complicated. I think snipes and Bey could gave wound up champions fighting alternative belt holders to Holmes. Maybe even Marvis?

 

yes i agree and you forgot to mention that he never gave witherspoon a rematch. the career of larry holmes is overrated like hell, and the few times that he fought a decent guy he had a hard fight. it is funny when some people say that he deserves to be rated above foreman because he had more defences.. haha can you see any of these guys beting foreman? i can´t... the only guy who would put a decent fight would be spoon but he did exactly the same thing with larry? and probably foreman woul have knocked him out.. plus larry fought a war vs a past prime norton, foreman raped norton in his absolute peak. plus foreman would ko guys that holmes avoided like pinklon thomas

 

marvis wasnt a title fight but apart from that you make for an interesting debate. Could larry have made stronger defences? Of course he could have, but i agree with Choklab's post. He has put it in a better way than i could have

 

I think that Holmes’s title challengers are weak, but I also think that they don’t need to be particularly strong.

Given his longevity and number of title defences, it is enough that they were good fighters, who were capable of posing different sets of problems.

 

I see Wlad and Holmes at about the same place in terms of comp faced and longevity.

 

I think this take on Larry Holmes represents you perfectly. Would love to see how this glass 9/10th empty spin would contrast with the 9/10th full version you'd manage to spin for Rocky. Pitch perfect. Let others play the anti-spin w you on this one. You did my work for me on this one.

 

I read an article once stating the Larry met more undefeated challengers then any other heavy king in history, and while it may be true I agree with the postings that say some of them were fairly weak contenders. Lets see, Cooney, Snipes, Spinks, Ocasio, Bey, Jones, Williams, Frank, Frazier, and Weatherspoon were all unbeaten meeting Holmes.

 

I agree with the general gist of your argument. But how can you rate Holmes' defence against Ali as "good defense but a completely shot Ali"?

How does that rate as a good defence? Because Ali had a reputation? IMO at least, there was zero merit in beating that version of Ali.

 

Its close! Vlad and Larry so far each beat 9 undefeated challengers. Larry met one more in Spinks but it was a loss of course.