Larry Holmes defenses-help me here

Yes that was a big fight that needed to happen regardless of how terrible it wound up being. What a sad moment.

If Ali came back and Holmes ducked him the other champion would have got greater recognition than Larry for defending against old Ali.

That's how complicated that era was. A retired champion had to supply public recognition.

Had the WBA supported their recognition to the winner of a fight between their #1 coetzee and the WBC champion after the retirement of ALI there would have been no need for any of the confusion.

The winner of that fight (Coetzee v Holmes) would have been the undisputed champion and all those 1980s heavyweight chalengers would have needed stronger resumes before fighting for the undisputed title. Tate, Tubbs, Dokes, Thomas included as well as Witherspoon, Williams, Bey, Marvis and all the others.

 

i did think the same thing

 

The whole era was a mess but it need not have been. I still don't think the rival champions were all that qualified for shots at the alternative title. With twice as many champions as is required it seems like the challenger needed to do half as much as what used to be required to face either champ. Holmes was meeting unqualified guys and so was the alternative champ. Problem was the alternative champ was losing to the Dokes, Tubbs, Tates and Berbicks where as Holmes was getting past the Snipes, Spinks, Berbicks, Cooney's and Witherspoon's.

What was Larry supposed to do? Is he suposed to tell Don "I don't want Cooney I want a rematch with Weaver". Or is he suposed to turn down as much money for Marvis to fight Page who was kind of "off the boil" and nobody took to seriously after he outpointed Snipes who Holmes already knocked him out?

The time for Holmes to fight page was after page did a better job on LeDoux than Larry did ...but Greg blew it against Berbick in his next relevent fight.

These guys were all the same.

Berbick beat Tate, lost to Holmes, beat Page, lost to Snipes, beat Thomas.

Weaver lost to Holmes, beat Tate, beat Coetzee, lost to Dokes, lost to Thomas, beat Williams, lost to Smith.

Snipes beat Coetzee, lost to Holmes, beat Berbick, lost to Witherspoon, lost to page and Evangelista.

Page lost to Berbick, beat snipes, lost to Witherspoon, lost to Bey, beat Coetzee, lost to Tubbs and Douglas...

Thomas could not beat Coetzee, beat Witherspoon, beat Weaver but lost to Berbick.

 

I feel that you short changed Weaver, Witherspoon, Smith, and Williams. These guys rose to the occassion... it is true that they had never fought this well before, but they would never fight this well again either. Each one of them was at their very best the night they faced Holmes.

The same can be said for Berbick, Snipes, and most definately Cooney.

Marvis Frazier was a fantastic amateur with wins over some big names. He had some decent wins as a pro and was undefeated. He was more worthy for a title shot than Leon Spinks was when he fought Ali in my opinion. Sure, Frazier proved to be not so special but after Holmes he had a few more decent wins before running into Tyson. In retrospect it's easy to say he wasn't shlt, but at the time he didn't seem all that awful. How did that one end again? That's right KO1 for Holmes.

Ossie Ocasio had the wins over a past prime Young and was undefeated. At the time nobody knew what to expect. Ocasio did became a world champ at CW and gave Holyfield a decent fight before getting stopped in the 11th round. Did he really improve after Holmes?

Leroy Jones and David Bey were nothing special but they were both undefeated and that appeals to some people. Jones did decision Weaver and Holmes was his only loss. He went almost 8 rounds with the HW Champ. Bey? Blame Greg Page, he lost to Bey and that's what got Bey his shot.

Tex Cobb? Tough S.O.B who knocked out Shavers, lost a SD to Norton, lost a MD to Dokes, and decisioned Bernardo Mercado. He lost all 15 rounds to Holmes but went on to lose a MD to Buster Douglas.

Would have been nice if Michael Dokes would have gotten a shot at Holmes.

Holmes reign wasn't the most exciting but I do rank him 2 all-time among HWs.

 

Sure, conveniently leave out Scott Frank in order to make your point!

 

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=485445

 

These posts remind me why I tend to rate the greats on a H2H basis moreso than a reume basis. I rely more on what each fighter brings to the table instead of who he fought as to how he ranks against the other greats. Let's face it, if you go by Holmes' resume alone then he doesn't rank very high on an alltime great list...at least in my opinion. But Holmes at his best ranks very high on a H2H basis as far as I'm concerned. He would've been trouble for any HW champ before or after him and surely would've beaten more than his fair share of them. Jack Johnson is held in high esteem by many but look at his resume as champ. Pretty shabby if you ask me but H2H he's another one who would give many of the other greats a hard time..if not beat them outright. Sometimes it's not a champs fault as to who was around at the time he ruled the roost. Ali had his share of iffy defenses but he was lucky to have men like Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Quarry etc.. around at the same time to buttress his resume while Holmes didn't....tho I do wish he somehow could've been matched with the likes of Page, Coetzee and Dokes...at least when they were good.

 

Don't bother larry holmes is grossly overrated on this website. People here think he was a top fighter, when all of us from that era know that he was just another Wladmir clinchko. A moderately talented guy who fought past prime and washed up opponents and ducked the best opposition available. To anyone who knows boxing what tyson and spinks did to him ought to settle all doubt.

 

Larry Holmes managed to pick an unreasonable amount of novice-type challengers, fighters with less than 20 professional fights.
To be fair, as someone mentioned above, some of those guys turned out to be tough and rose to the occassion. Witherspoon, most notably, was no average 15-0 heavyweight, for example. Having said that, Holmes arguably couldn't beat him anyway, and same could be said about "Truth" Williams.

Holmes was a cagey skillful fighter whose style benefitted greatly with his experience, and he feasted on inexperienced challengers too often.

 

^This is the fair an accurate truth. Holmes was a good fighter, and for a period during the 80s maybe the best fighter at the time but he wasn't some super elite fighter or nothing like that.