Kool..... Because I'm not looking for trouble..... Larry Holmes was pissed at King during that time.... However, Don King understood the economics of the business back then..... Holmes eventually came around and saw the light of day............... I know Gerry Cooney was over-hyped.... I saw right through it in 1982..... I was a Sophmore in High School..... Cooneymania was strong and feverish during that time..... Every white boy / honkie was sold on Cooney; I was NOT!! I was a Larry Holmes fan................ However, on June 11, 1982, Gerry Cooney fought Larry Holmes like a solid contender....... Cooney did rise to the occasion to provide a worthy effort / fight...... I love to review "Holmes-Cooney" on the VCR with beers and friends......:good Even though Greg Page had more skill and athletic ability than Cooney had, I still contend that since BOTH men fought and lost on the same night and card, that Cooney would've beaten Greg Page on June 11, 1982 had they fought.......... Cooney just could NOT beat the great Larry Holmes...:bbb Page lost to Trevor Berbick on the undercard, and we all know Cooney was TKO'd in 13 by Holmes..... :hey Shavers lost to Jim Tillis by a decision.....:hey Godamn, I love that card / event....:yep MR.BILL:deal
Greg Page probably had even more problems w/ King at the time than Holmes did. Ad I disagree that Cooney beats Page in 82 as well. Page was a guy that would bring his A game to a big fight and his B game to the small bouts. He had a good set of whiskers and threw combinations and moved his feet in there. I thought back then Cooney was any better than a .500 fighter if he'd fought the top competition; Dokes is a tough fight/Page/Coetzee would've been dangerous/Weaver/Tillis and his movement aren't going to suit Cooney all that well/Witherspoon/Snipes is dangerous and that was another bout that never took place with Cooney.
I think Holmes had the perfect style to trouble and beat Louis. Fast on his feet, hard chinned, consistent jab, power( not the one shot but enough to keep Joe at bay) and a complete arsenal of punches. I think Louis would find it difficult to find Holmes CONSISTENTLY, which he would have to do because hes not knocking Larry out with one shot. With that being said, if Holmes would have traded with Louis, he would have been taken out. If he didn't, he wins a unanimous decision. Hes just too technically sound.
I just did BOTH "Louis-Walcott" fights last night...... Walcott made Louis look real slow and foolish at times............ Walcott dropped Louis 3X in two fights.......... Larry Holmes was bigger, quicker, stronger & better than Walcott.......... Holmes beats Louis by 15 rd decision..... MR.BILL
That was a great card. I also love to drink beer, eat chips and rip farts off the couch to old fights:good
1. Louis was past his prime here 2. Holmes was NOT quicker or stronger than walcott 3. holmes is nowhere near as elusive as walcottt 4. Holmes couldnt avoid a right hand if you told him it was coming. I just rewatched Holmes vs Weaver last night. Weaver was 19-8 but made holmes look like an amatuer at times the way he landed his right hand at will. Louis was bigger stronger faster better puncher than weaver.
How does an elusive guy get himself knockout out six times? How elusive can you be when you find yourself counted out against the likes of Abe Simon? Yeah, Walcott was real elusive in the 13th round against Marciano when he backed into the ropes and showed Rocky his chin. How many seconds did it take Rocky to find Walcott's chin the next time around? How elusive can a person be when a past-his-prime Louis can find his chin? Shall I continue? Why bother? Elusive is not a word that describes Walcott. Cute? Sure. Elusive? Please.
Yeah, it was harsh. Walcott was a good boxer. I don't deny that. But some people elevate him to an undeserved status and I have to go with some Sunday punches.