Larry Holmes had a much harder 48-0 than Rocky Marciano

Kiernan you clearly don't know **** about Marciano. Charles was still a great fighter if you look at film. So was Walcott. Louis was still decent, and Moore could knock most fighters out at that weight despite him being past it, too.

 

You guys know when you're being trolled, no?

 

Yeah, you and me know what he means. :yep

 

We do, even as muffled as it is from under the bridge

 

Honestly, Muhammad Ali (GOAT), Leon Spinks (The man who beat Ali!), Tex Cobb (Great actor), and Marvis Frazier. I'm convinced now.

 

Spinks isn't part of Larry's 48-0, and by the way he lost those fights.

Larry's opponents were all slow and easy to hit and avoid. Marciano had to fight slick, clever guys like Ezzard Charles (33 years old), Jersey Joe Walcott (38 years old but in his prime, as proven by the HW championship belt he had at the time), Archie Moore (39 years old but reigning LHW hcamp at the time, so you can't say he was shot), Roland LaStarza, Harry "Kid" Matthews. Rex Layne was also a very good fighter and would have been champ if not for Marciano.

Joe Louis was 37 and on an 8-fight winning streak when he fought Marciano.

Holmes fought shot versions of Ali (shot is an understatement here), Shavers, Norton. And the last two gave him wars.

 

I think there is an argument that Holmes 48-0 was harder, but the OP doesn't make a good one.

Holmes has 21 Lineal title fights for his 48-0 compared to Rocky's 7. Although Rocky fought more top contenders pre-title, Holmes still fought more top opponents all in all.

Holmes fought bigger men like 6'7 Cooney, many different styles and he also fought younger opponents nearer their primes and many undefeated fighters. HE fought future world champions. The criticism could be some were green, where as the opposite is oft criticised with Rocky's opponents

Most knowlegable fans would consider Norton, Witherspoon, Cooney to be of a very high level and Weaver, Shavers, Smith, Snipes, Berbick,William to all be good challengers too

Both Louis and Ali were shot, Ali more so, but Rocky gets credit for Louis, Holmes gets none for Ali despite Ali fighting a close fight with Berbick a year later.

Ofcourse Holmes biggest challenge was his age, by the time he got in with M Spinks he was 2 months from his 36th birthday

 

Not to mention Larry defended title in 8 consecutive calender years which I think might be a record aswell - Holmes may not have got the magic mark of 49 but he did plenty of other things that no one else did so you've got to say how great a champion he was whereever you rank him

 

I think that if you were going to make the argument for Holmes here, the centrepeice of your case would be the fact that he was simply fighting at the elite level for a greater duration/number of fights.

If you trid to make the argument based on quality of opposition, then you would certainly be giving the Marciano suporters a fight that they could win.

 

You are completely wrong atsch

Louis was the # 2 rated heavyweight contender when Marciano fought him, and had won 8 fights in a row leading up to the Marciano fight. I don't think Ali was capable of beating any half decent fighter by 1980.

 

EXACTLY the answer i was going to come with....late as usual....spot on fella :good

 

Well, yeah, he did have a harder 48-0.

But he missed 49-0, Rocky didn't.

Holmes is the greater fighter, but Rocky is right behind him for this reason.

 

This is ahistorical. Louis had actually worked his way back into contention with eight wins, including Lee Savold. Ali was shot due to Parkinson's and thyroid problems. Louis was a lgit contender, Ali has no business being in a ring.

 

One thing we do have to remember with regard to Holmes' 48 is, much like anyother fighter you care to mention his first 26 fights were pretty much against non-entities who were unknown in there own living rooms (with some less than spectacular results in all reality) - some examples:

in Larry's 4th pro bout a guy named Don Branch with a 1-6 record KO'd by 5 times took Larry the full distance

in his 6th fight one of Foreman's "5 opponents" (who were all a joke), Jerry Judge, also took Larry the distance

7th opponents the 188lb Kevin Isaac put Larry down

Larry's 8th pro bout came against Howard Darlington who had the outstanding record of 1-19-1!!

In 16th bout the 209lb Larry was taken the full 10 by the 186lb Charlie James who came in with a very average record of 5-5-1 (he would be KO'd by his next 4 opponents)

His 18th opponent Leon Shaw came in with a less than stellar 9-9-1 record

Journeyman Billy Joiner was 10-10-3

No.21 Fred Askew came in at 15-12-1

And mixed in between these were generally sub standard opposition - his first two top opponents both took him the distance

Another thing to bear in mind that aside from the year and a half out after Spinks II his career then really followed on with fights every year until 2003 so for me you have to take his career record in its entirity as it was a continuation of a career for me (much in the same way as we consider with say Joe Louis - even though Louis had getting on for 3 years out) - finishing up with 6 defeats so for me it slips a little overall in comparison with Marciano's which involved the record (until Tyson) for consecutive KO's at the start of a career (and the general destructive nature of Rocky's performances on the whole ) and the fact that his record against his top 12 opponents is top heavy with KO's aswell at 11-1 and couple this with the fact that Larry actually defended against a lot of relative novices such as 10 fight Marvis Frazier, 15 fight Bonecrusher Smith, 14 fight David Bey, 16 fight Carl The Truth (and arguably got beat by one of them - the 15 fight Witherspoon) - these guys would never have been allowed shots against Marciano ever - it just wouldn't have been allowed when you had great guys around with getting on for 100 fights on their records like Ez Charles and Archie Moore