Larry Holmes vs Deontay Wilder

hobby rider · Oct 27, 2022

Loudon said: ↑

Redbeard7,

I’ve been studying the sport for 30 years.

A 42 year old Larry Holmes hung with a prime Evander and beat Mercer.

Mercer beat Morrison and arguably beat an ATG in Lennox.

Today, we have Usyk and Fury who look to be very special talents, despite not having stellar HW resumes. After those, nobody else would have been a standout fighter in the 80’s and 90’s.

Go and look at the Ring’s current top 10.

Or any other organisation, company or publication.

Of course Holmes, Morrison and Mercer would be in today’s top 10.

Guys like Parker and Whyte etc, have been in the top 10 for a long time now.

That’s not how it works at all.

Wilder gets credit if he beats competent fighters. I give him credit for beating Ortiz, despite Ortiz being old. Because Ortiz has a lot of ability. But most of his opponents are just average guys who’d have been cannon fodder for any elite HW.

On what planet would beating a 90’s Mercer be akin to beating Arreola? Get real. As if Chris Arreola could have gone close to beating Lennox. It’s hilarious how you have to hype up these guys to give Wilder’s resume a boost.

Sure, fighters can have an off night. Or they can just get caught like anybody can. It only takes a punch. But you can objectively analyse their abilities and their other performances.

You can try and denigrate a guy like Mercer as much as you want. But I know for a fact that other than Ortiz, you cannot name me one other win on Wilder’s resume which would have been better than a win over a prime Ray Mercer.

Stiverne and Duhaupas have done nothing. And you only rate them because Wilder has beaten them. If they weren’t on Wilder’s resume, and a guy like Holmes had beaten them, you’d no doubt be singing a different tune, telling me how poor they were.

Yes, Wilder might not have endured losses like some of those guys did. But then at the same time, he hasn’t got their victories either. And I’m sure none of those would have had an issue with Wilder’s WBC reign, where he fought just twice per year against mostly B and C level opposition.

Again, Tyson did not school Wlad in Germany.

You are living in a fantasy.

I’ve never disputed his power or how dangerous he is.

He’s the most dangerous HW on the planet.

He’s very unpredictable.

He’s fast, powerful and confident.

A very dangerous combination.

He’d have a genuine punchers chance against anyone.

However, due to his flaws and his lack of top level wins, he’d be an underdog against almost every great of the past.

Like you’ve just alluded to above, Stiverne, Breazeale and Helenius were just fringe contenders. Yet guys like that make up the bulk of Wilder’s resume. Which is the exact reason why people like me say that he’s still unproven. And it’s the exact reason why I’d favour a guy like Holmes over him. Because as yet, he hasn’t proven that he should be/should have been favoured over such guys.

Again, he’s an exciting, dangerous fighter who deserves respect. But he hasn’t done anything out of the ordinary, apart display extra ordinary power. Again, I’m sure that many other HW could have replicated his WBC reign, and beaten the same guys as he’s beaten. Sure, they might not have been able to have replicated his exact performances/knockouts, but his resume really wouldn’t have been an issue to most great HW’s of the past. And I’m not talking about his 3 fights with Fury. I’m just talking about his wins. I’m sure a guy like Holmes etc, wouldn’t have had an issue replicating those wins he’s had.
Click to expand...

You’re wasting your time.

Neet thinks Artur Szpillka is a worthwhile defence for a world champion. There’s a reason he’s on at least his third alt, the guy is deluded.

mark ant · Oct 27, 2022

Loudon said: ↑

Redbeard7,

I’ve been studying the sport for 30 years.

A 42 year old Larry Holmes hung with a prime Evander and beat Mercer.

Mercer beat Morrison and arguably beat an ATG in Lennox.

Today, we have Usyk and Fury who look to be very special talents, despite not having stellar HW resumes. After those, nobody else would have been a standout fighter in the 80’s and 90’s.

Go and look at the Ring’s current top 10.

Or any other organisation, company or publication.

Of course Holmes, Morrison and Mercer would be in today’s top 10.

Guys like Parker and Whyte etc, have been in the top 10 for a long time now.

That’s not how it works at all.

Wilder gets credit if he beats competent fighters. I give him credit for beating Ortiz, despite Ortiz being old. Because Ortiz has a lot of ability. But most of his opponents are just average guys who’d have been cannon fodder for any elite HW.

On what planet would beating a 90’s Mercer be akin to beating Arreola? Get real. As if Chris Arreola could have gone close to beating Lennox. It’s hilarious how you have to hype up these guys to give Wilder’s resume a boost.

Sure, fighters can have an off night. Or they can just get caught like anybody can. It only takes a punch. But you can objectively analyse their abilities and their other performances.

You can try and denigrate a guy like Mercer as much as you want. But I know for a fact that other than Ortiz, you cannot name me one other win on Wilder’s resume which would have been better than a win over a prime Ray Mercer.

Stiverne and Duhaupas have done nothing. And you only rate them because Wilder has beaten them. If they weren’t on Wilder’s resume, and a guy like Holmes had beaten them, you’d no doubt be singing a different tune, telling me how poor they were.

Yes, Wilder might not have endured losses like some of those guys did. But then at the same time, he hasn’t got their victories either. And I’m sure that none of those would have had an issue with Wilder’s WBC reign, where he fought just twice per year against mostly B and C level opposition.

Again, Tyson did not school Wlad in Germany.

You are living in a fantasy.

I’ve never disputed his power or how dangerous he is.

He’s the most dangerous HW on the planet.

He’s very unpredictable.

He’s fast, powerful and confident.

A very dangerous combination.

He’d have a genuine punchers chance against anyone.

However, due to his flaws and his lack of top level wins, he’d be an underdog against many greats of the past.

Like you’ve just alluded to above, Stiverne, Breazeale and Helenius were just fringe contenders. Yet guys like that make up the bulk of Wilder’s resume. Which is the exact reason why people like me say that he’s still unproven. And it’s the exact reason why I’d favour a guy like Holmes over him. Because as yet, he hasn’t proven that he should be/should have been favoured over such guys.

Again, he’s an exciting, dangerous fighter who deserves respect. But he hasn’t done anything out of the ordinary, apart from display extra ordinary power. Again, I’m sure that many other HW’s could have replicated his WBC reign, and beaten the same guys as he’s beaten. Sure, they might not have been able to have replicated his exact performances/knockouts, but his WBC reign really wouldn’t have been an issue to most great HW’s of the past. And I’m not talking about his 3 fights with Fury. I’m just talking specifically about his reign and other wins. I’m sure that a guy like Holmes etc, wouldn’t have had an issue replicating them.
Click to expand...

Mercer and Morrison were easy to hit in that brawl, Tommy punched himself out, Lewis and Mercer easy to hit in their brawl too, Lewis stood right in front of Mercer in a small ring, Mercer was just tough plodder when he fought Holmes.

mark ant · Oct 27, 2022

Loudon said: ↑

Probably not.

He’s got different attributes to Wilder.

It would have been a very different fight.

However, I’m sure that Holmes could have followed Wilder’s same timeline and replicated the same wins.
Click to expand...

Only two fighters on Wilder`s resume would have troubled Holmes, Fury and Ortiz, Helenius is a plodder.

Loudon · Oct 27, 2022

mark ant said: ↑

Mercer and Morrison were easy to hit in that brawl, Tommy punched himself out, Lewis and Mercer easy to hit in their brawl too, Lewis stood right in front of Mercer in a small ring, Mercer was just tough plodder when he fought Holmes.
Click to expand...

Many of today’s guys are also easy to hit.

I didn’t say that they were great fighters, only that they’d be top 10 guys today.

rinsj · Oct 28, 2022

On The Money said: ↑

I doubt even prime Holmes would ko a guy like Helenius in a round. We can say that.
Click to expand...

I doubt he would too, but that's really beside the point. The gap in punching power is negated by the gap in boxing skills and ring smarts. Holmes, as quoted "You have to make a guy drunk before you mug him". Over 15 rounds, Wilder gets mugged.

mark ant · Oct 28, 2022

Loudon said: ↑

Many of today’s guys are also easy to hit.

I didn’t say that they were great fighters, only that they’d be top 10 guys today.
Click to expand...

Maybe.

Log in or Sign up

Larry Holmes vs Deontay Wilder

[prime] Holmes vs [prime] Wilder

Easton Assassin

Bronze Bomber

hobby rider Well-Known Member Full Member

mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

Loudon Loyal Member Full Member

rinsj Active Member Full Member

mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Larry Holmes vs Deontay Wilder

[prime] Holmes vs [prime] Wilder

Easton Assassin

Bronze Bomber

hobby rider Well-Known Member Full Member

mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

Loudon Loyal Member Full Member

rinsj Active Member Full Member

mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member