Larry Holmes Questions

1. Not at all. Even a little.

2. Well, I do think he should have fought Thomas in 1984/1985.

3. It would have brought him to an even higher level. I have him top 5 now. He might have been able to make an argument for top 3.

4. I would have been interested in Thomas in 1984 or Page in 1983/1984. But nobody that makes me really that unhappy with him.

I DO think that Weaver and Witherspoon should have received rematches.

 

1. Do you hold it against Larry Holmes for not unifying 1 belt during a 7 year period while Mike Tyson managed to unify all 3 belts in a 1 year period?

To an extent, but not as much as others.

2. Do you hold it against Larry Holmes for taking on some lesser foes instead of fighting Pinklon Thomas, Greg Page, Michael Dokes, Gerrie Coetzee?

Not really, mostly due to the fact that he got more money to fight other people which should not have been possible to happen, but I'd bet that any other champ would've done the same if they were in Holmes's shoes.

Also given the fact that Holmes was going to fight Coetzee, but it was called off 1 month before due to things out of his hands, it's hard to really knock him for it.

3. How much would it have helped Holmes legacy had he defeated Greg Page(mandatory defense) in 83, Gerrie Coetzee(had that fight come off in 84), and Pinklon Thomas(in 84-85)???

It'd have helped, but at the same time people would criticize them because of how hot and cold they were anyway. The entire era was lose-lose for Holmes seeing how no matter what his competition would be criticized.

4. Who is one fighter you really thought Holmes should have fought but missed out on?

Either a Witherspoon rematch (even though I had Holmes the close, clear winner) or a fight with Pinklon Thomas.

 

For years Larry was 'the forgotten champion' then it was said so much that he got up to no.3 on a lot of people's lists, mine included, in order to look cool, essentially. I have him at 5 or 6 most days now and most seem to find the middle ground with Larry nowadays, which is great.

8 or 9 is probably fairer. This thread is quite one sided but some of these issues are important ones when judging Larry's reign.

The lack of title unification doesn't bother me. Larry was the World champion, and if politics got in the way of him unifying (he loved his IBF belt, didn't he? I know he held WBC first) then I blame the trinket holder rather than Holmes.

Weaver got the better of Dokes in their second fight IMO, but Larry had beaten Weaver before. So out of the guys he didn't face, I'd have preferred to see Larry take on Pinklon Thomas rather than Greg Page.

 

Belts mean nothing.

Yes.

It would have helped Holmes' legacy considerably.

Too many to mention.

 

Good post.

 

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

3. I still rank Holmes as my #3 heavyweight.

4. Greg Page. George Foreman would have been interesting but it was imposible.

 

Holmes actively sought the Foreman fight, it was Foreman who evaded it.

 

Yes, I definitely hold these things against Holmes. Larry was openly cynical, saying he wanted "to fight little guys for a lot of money"...and that's what he did. I think Larry gave the finger to fans and the general public, pissed at them for not treating him like Ali. I don't think he had great regard for the title...it was just something he wanted to have, but didn't have a ton of pride in how he managed it. A great fighter, but could have cemented himself as GOAT, in my opinion.

 

Unifying a useless title means nothing though.

 

A big part of why allot of these fights not happening was the politics between Don King and Holmes. King promoted Page, Dokes and Coetzee amongst others. King was the reason these fights didn't happen

Page was Holmes mandatory in '83 and Don King offered Holmes 2.5 million for the fight, Holmes demanded 5million for this. Holmes took more money, receiving 3million to face Frazier than King was offering for the Page fight. Was Frazier, the son of a champ, really more of a lucrative fight than Page, or was King not offering a fair purse?

In 1984 Holmes signed to fight Coetzee for 13million with Coetzee to receive 9million. The promoters couldn't pay the fighters.The WBA actually demanded Holmes enter the ring as a challenger or strip Coetzee. King and Holmes again couldn't come to terms

The problem Holmes had is the biggest fights out there for him financially were ALi and Cooney. He waited 2 years for Ali, beating Shavers in the interim fresh off Shavers destroying Norton who he won the title off. The Cooney fight was in the pipe line from after the Ali fight. Ideally he fights other contenders in the interim but from a business perspective the massive money from Cooney can not be risked by fighting risky fights.

He should ideally have fought all the best contenders but the contenders he beat, held their own or beat the men he didn't beat. Page lost to Berbick, Coetzee lost to Weaver, Dokes lost to Coeztee. Holmes said 'All these fighters beating each other but ain't no one beating Larry Holmes'

That was the problem, no clear number 1 contender for more than a year at the time, so no big money contender. And even with the lucrative Coetzee fight, King wanted to stiff Holmes on the purse and Holmes wasn't getting butt ****ed by King, so more power to him

In all seriousness it does weaken his resume but he's still clearly the numero uno. Don King is the reason these fights didn't happen in my view

 

1. tyson was part of the don king unification tourny, larry was litteraly just kings *****, plus he beat 3 wba champs and 2 wbc champs.

2. larry should have pushed for the dokes fight from 79/81, page and coetzee would have been very good, i dont hold it against him, but i do think it might weaken his resume.

3. i think it would of helped, but not so much... greg page was a 1 win wonder, then again so was thomas and coetzee. great fighters are the time, but he had a small window to fight them when they was good, other wise it was pointless.

4. dokes in the 79-81 period. any wbc-ibf unification of the other 3 would have been nice. i also think tony tubbs should be given a shout in your post, he was a monster from 85-85

 

A focused Pinklon Thomas would have stood an excellent chance against Holmes in 1984. Larry was clearly passed his best by then.

 

the no 2 contender of the early/mid 80's was tim witherspoon imo.

 

no i would say thomas or weaver/coetzee might have been no 2 hw, tbh i cant pick the no 2 heavyweight of the early/mid 80.s

 

Holmes never unified cuz neither Weaver or Dokes ever cried out for Holmes in the early 80s, plus, Holmes had already stopped Weaver in '79...

Coetzee and Holmes should've fought in '84, but something went haywire with the promotion...

Holmes likely did duck a peaking Page in '83 and '84, but Holmes claimed the risk wasn't worth a mere $2.5 million dollars. Holmes wanted much more, but Page never had the marketability of a Cooney... Holmes failed to see that in the early 80s...

Pinklon Thomas would've been very tough for Holmes in '84 or '85, but I'd pick the 1992 version of Holmes who schooled Mercer and went 12 good rds with Holyfield to hammer the shot Thomas of '92 who by the way is 8 to 9 yrs younger than Holmes...

I rate Holmes # 2 on my ATG list.... I sleep tight at night, too....

MR.BILL