Larry Holmes- level of opposition

weaver and bonecrusher weere featherfists?!!!! riiigggghttttt and youre acting like any fighter was able to ko mercer and williams..last time i checked they only lost by ko twice and once respectively

 

THAT is exactly what I am talking about.

His SD against Ken Norton ("WAR") is a proof of that he couldn't DOMINATE Norton. This is exactly the mind melt, that I complain about. If Wlad would DOMINATE Ken Norton then it's "Oh, the division sucks. Look what bad opponents call out Klitschko". When Holmes fights 15 rounds to a SD15 decision then it's a "testament of guts and balls" and "career highlight". No, it's a testament of "defense too weak" and "offense too weak".

Yeah, sure. He needs 15 rounds to split-decision featherfist (and weak-defensed) Ken Norton, but he would destroy today's heavyweight. Complete baseless speculation.

Another baseless speculation.

Yes, Holmes will be "The Man". At least not "The God" like Ali.

 

Ken Norton beat an Ali who was Light Years ahead of either Wlad, Ruslan Chagaev, or Sam Peter. The three of those morons couldnt carry Ali's Jockstrap, between all 3 of em. :good

 

I never mentioned ANYTHING regarding Wlad vs. Tyson.

 

Yes, featherfisted because you have to deduct the bums from their KO rate. Sure if you line up 30 bums and KO all of them you have a high KO ratio (Eric Esch Effect) but it's meaningless for a comparable record analysis. First you delete the bums (= below usable margin = loses 25% or more of his fights) then you get the first clear picture. Bonecrusher Smith and Weaver have a bad KO ratio even if you LEAVE the bums in.

 

Bonecrusher went 12 with a primed out Tyson, and if it was a 3 man tag team boxing match, Wlad, Sam and Ruslan against a PRIME Tyson, you would need three body bags.

 

Oops, typo.

I meant:
Spion thinks that "Wlad has a chance against Holmes" is laughable so I had to remind him of Wlad's KO ratio which is higher than Tyson who DID KO Holmes.

 

3 bags for Ruslan, Sam and Tyson?

Bonecrusher Smith managed to go 12 rounds because

1. Smith is tall. Tyson never KOed a quality opponent taller than 6'3'' (except Savarese), see http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2090491&postcount=69
2. He used his arms effectively in a style that reminds me very much of Klitschko's defense

 

Holmes is a great but a lot of the fighters you mentioned were fought after his reign and some he lost to. It´s always kinda hard to evaluate fighters who dominate in a weak era and don´t have many fighters who can really challenge them.

If prime Holmes had been in an era with Frazier, Foreman, Ali in their primes or Holyfield, Tyson, Bowe, Lewis - we might know better how good he really was.

 

No. One of the bags would have to be XXL to accomadate a 6'7 unconscious Ukranian.

 

I realize that Wlad has a good KO ratio but to me that sort of thing isn't as important as the fighter themselves. Cooney had a great KO ratio too and was six feet six and a half inches tall. Just on a head to head basis I believe that Holmes would catch up to Wlad and take him out as well. At the very least a UD. No disrespect to Klitschko.

 

Holmes legacy is similar to Lennox Lewis (though I rate Lennox higher on acheivement) in that they will both be maligned by doubters about 1 or 2 fighters that they could have/should have fought. With little exception both fought the best in front of them and in most cases came out on top.

 

Tyson's KO'ed a list of heavies that probably couldn't beat today's Thompson.

 

Larry Holmes fought good compt, it wasn't his fault that many of the 80's heavyweights didn't fullfill their potential.However, he did duck Thomas, Witherspoon, and definitely Page.