Larry Holmes Says The Toughest Matchup For Him Would've Been Marciano!

Brilliant observation :good

 

I think some people are forgetting that Ali did spar with Marciano, (And did learn a lot from it I might add)

Dont think Ali said he would lose to Marciano, but he did said Marciano would give him a hard assignment, mostly base on there filming.

You can call the outcome bs or not,(I dont think Ali getting ko either) But Marciano does have the style to trouble Ali.

Same with Holmes, Ali did comment on how impress he was with Marciano in regards of passing that jab of his.

So this is not going to be a fight were Ali skips around the ring, and thowns out his jab outpointed Marciano in a easy points win with Rocky landed nothing to little.

This is going to be a war imo, that would be a battle of wills that can go one way or other. Marciano WILL make Ali fight out of the trenchs, and Ali is good at fighting that way, but so is Rocky.

This could be a close fight imo.

 

If I could jump the gun and address a few other issues that JohnThomas brought up before he has had a chance to reply.

It is important to me that some of you see the distinction I am trying to make especially given the the vast knowledge that you have about this sport which attracts us all. But I know enough, especially given the profession I was in, to realize that most of what we think is probably mistaken. So we have to take conceptual distinctions with a grain of salt.

This is especially so when you realize what I am going to try to get out of that distinction I made. I can make this clear by addressing another point John rightly brought up as did many of you and that is we should question the motives Holmes in particular might have for making his assertions. And many of you have rightly pointed out that Holmes has said many things about Marciano as in the famous Ali's jockstrap remark.

So when is Holmes speaking the truth? That is a legitimate question if we are that interested in sorting out Holmes' life, character, etc. so that we have enough knowledge of him and his circumstances to know whether he is likely saying something for truth's sake or for some other reason. And we all know there are many other reasons. Not only do we have to decide this but be willing to appeal to his authority if he is speaking the truth.

The distinction I made earlier attempts to circumvent this problem to a certain degree. When anyone makes evaluations or the like, as when they might say this or that fighter will win, or annihilate the other, or this fighter can't carry that fighters jock strap, he is saying things that both cause us to wonder about the evidence for his judgment as well as suspect his motives. Indeed, it is hard enough to try to make correct appraisals as it is.

Unless we can be assured he is speaking out of the motive of truth and nothing else, we must remain in doubt about the usefulness of his remarks as far as their correctness goes. And our use of said figther's authority is very limited.

But on the other hand, when a fighter is appraising himself fighting another fighter, deciding something about his own characteristics, his capabilities, etc., all of which he has intimate knowledge of, he realizes he is entering a domain that has some degree of built-in restraints. You might even call this domain a public order where he realizes that people will know something about him, his style, his fighting capabilities, etc., as so far demonstrated by his actions. And the public can react critically. So when he speaks of himself in those terms he is more inclined to take a more proper measure of himself. And given that he knows himself better than most he knows where he stands in this domain and must be somewhat cautious in stating his appraisal. Especially with posterity looming. That can be vitally important.

Now add to this the knowledge that say Holmes would have to have about Marciano if he (Holmes) is going to say something intelligent about an imagined fight with Marciano. This is the knowledge that assesses Marciano himself in the way Holmes did. He speaks of Marciano's characteristics. If Holmes didn't have this kind of knowledge of Marciano as well of the aforementioned knowledge of himself, then Holmes would not be able to appraise Marciano as being his toughest fight. Nor would he make much sense to those who are listening.

So let me ask everyone something. Do you think in this latter scenario, where Holmes is thinking about his fight with Marciano as being his toughest, we find a better chance of arriving at some truth? I actually did not ask this earlier or even bring it up for that is not what I really wanted to get out of the distinction I made. But I do wonder if in a scenario like this we have the better chance of getting some truth from a fighter than in the other case of Holmes talking about Ali's jock strap.

In a way, it is like making a distinction between assertions expressing who is going to win or is the best, etc. and merely talking about who would be a tough or toughest fight. The former seems to invite more enthusiasm and excitement and lends itself to more exaggeration and hyperbole, or even understatement, than the latter which appears to focus on concrete boxing knowledge itself. So are the chances better we get more truth out of the latter case?

But even if we deny this and claim that Holmes is still making up a story to satisfy a motive that has nothing to do with truth, I still believe those sorts of assertions are important (I mean the assertions regarding who would be a tough or toughest fight). For these kinds of assertions can be correlated with many other such assertions rising from various times and out of various conditions. Not only in a particular fighter's life but a broader historical scope. These assertions carry important truth content for they tell us something about the fighter who makes such assertions and much about the fighter he is discussing. And they do so irrespective of the question of whether or not he is telling the truth. We can all tell when he rises to the demands of knowledge and sense. You could almost say he finds it necessary to conform to the truth so far as that is considered historically.

Sorry, the post is too long and I will try to come back to this in another.

 

I could name a number of instances where a great fighter thought an opponent would be tough, and it turned out to be an easy night. Holmes has much knowledge about the sport. But I doubt he would be able to predict more accurately who would give him more trouble than the typical fan who has good knowledge of the science of the sport and a solid mathematical background. I do think he tends to say the more accurate statements out of other fighters when he doesn't let bias affect his logical mind.

 

Dezbeast, I am absolutely certain you could! And while I think you merged the distinctions I was trying to make between evaluations like predictions, who will win, etc., and the other quite distinct matter of a fighter merely discussing who his most difficult opponent might be, you have nevertheless hit the nail on the head when you said Holmes has much knowledge of the sport. That is exactly what I am trying to tap. And I further I agree that in the matter of making predictions, even the most knowledgeable person makes mistakes.

But notice I wasn't talking about Holmes making predictions which is why I said I think you overlooked my distinctions. Rather I am trying to find a way to give voice to Holmes' knowledge without the usual suspicions and mistakes which normally accompanies grandiose evaluations.

I am trying to take advantage of Holmes' knowledge (and other great fighters too) by withdrawing the manifestation of that knowledge from the domain of making evaluations like who will win the fight, who is the greatest, and who doesn't deserve to carry Ali's jock strap.

You see, I think considerable knowledge comes out with less chance of fabrication and private motives when Holmes is discussing who would be his most difficult opponent. There he is more reflective and informative. And as I have tried to communicate, it is there that Holmes has a chance to look over Marciano's fighting characteristics, along with considering his own characteristics and qualities and then comes to the measured conclusion that a fight with Marciano could be his most difficult.

That is enough to give us valuable knowledge especially as coming from one like Holmes. He has been there and done it. But at least, in this context, he is concentrating more on boxing matters which all of you understand. Indeed, many of you have filled in details of their styles more or less explaining what Holmes had in mind.

All of this without having to worry about jock straps and who doesn't deserve to carry it.

And what tops this off as being valuable knowledge is the fact that it is just one reflective remark by one ATG in a long line of remarks by others, each speaking from their own individuality and circumstances but addressing a common theme with common characteristics, ie a fight with Marciano.

The summary of that kind of knowledge (gathered from the kind of remarks I am discussing) has much import for the simple reason there is so much agreement among the ATGs. That is hard to ignore, isn't it?

 

Hey Pete,

I feel like the thread is owning me!

 

I just want to quickly respond to the posters who say that a professional boxer's opinion, much less an all time great, doesn't mean much. WTF? I don't take my car to my doctor. Just because George Foreman has said some things in the heat of the moment (& a suggestion that LL is an ATG is not outrageous), doesn't mean I don't value his opinion more than others. We have to watch out for comments that might be influenced by bias, which I think is pretty common among fighters and important in interpreting Holmes' early jock-strap comments. But what motive colors his comments now. I'm sorry, but appealing to the fans just doesn't ring true. I think they are honest comments that make sense and have been stated by other ATGs. Let's get real - why on earth would Ali prop up a white guy in the 70's if he didn't believe it. I also think his favorable comments about Tunney say a lot about Tunney for the same reason.

 

Seems like a publicity stunt given his previous remarks regarding Marciano. I like Holmes as a fighter, but he talks a lot of ****. Always has.

 

This content is protected

 

This is what's wrong with some posters; they overrate weight differences and discount almost everything else. I really rate Holmes and DO favour him in a fight with Marciano, but because of all round skill, not just size. Tyson Fury is better than Ali if size is the only asset to consider. Size is a factor, not everything.