Larry Holmes vs Riddick Bowe

There's more holes in this post than swiss cheese, and coming from someone who doubts what I've seen, I'd say its equally discrediting. After starting a whole thread on why I felt Foreman's comeback effort was superior to Holmes', most have looked at my reasoning with an impartial eye, but I can see that its a lost cause here.......

 

Sure there is. How about this. Lets start with Holmes opponents. I remember these guys well, so maybe I can refresh your memory.

Mercer, silver medalist, future WBO champ, would give Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield extremely close fights, viciously knocked out Tommy Morrison who boxed circles around Foreman

Jesse Fergeson, highly touted prospect never amounted to much other than being a gate keeper for the better fighters. Fought just about everyone during his career, from Tyson, Bowe, Mcall, Bruno Mercer etc...

Jose Ribalta, contender, fought Tyson and gave a brave performance before being stopped very late in the fight. Big strong guy with decent boxing ability

James Smith, former WBA champion, one of the few who took Tyson the distance in a losing effort knocked out in 3 of his last 8 fights

Brian Nielson, silver olympic medalist, fought Holmes to a very controversial ending or robbery as I called it. Knocked out Crawford Grimsley, and not a bad technician overall for a fat man.

Oliver Mcall, current WBC champion and probably had the best chin in heavyweight boxing, so it was a forgone conclusion that he would see the last bell

Quinne Navarre, fringe contender, lost to a comebacking James Douglas in an entertaining fight. Not a great fighter, but leagues better than a Crawford Grimsley level fighter.

Ok now lets look at Foremans opponents;

Alex Stewart fringe contender, knocked out in 4 of his last 8 fights,

Crawford Grimsley knocked out by Brian Nielson, and knocked out by James Thunder in 13 seconds, one of the fastest KO's in boxing history. Extended foreman the full distance.

Shannon Briggs Known for his fast starts and quick fades, usually stopped in the later rounds by the better guys. Four fights prior fought in the now legendary night of the young heavyweights with all the touted up and comers. He was stopped by Darrol Wilson in three rounds after he ran out of gas. Wilson was later quickly knocked out by David Tua


Lou Savarese, up until that point Savarese's biggest win was over Buster Mathis, his biggest name opponent and was Mathis last fight, after losing to Mike Tyson in 3 and getting beat down by Riddick Bowe in 4 (ruled a no contest for Bowe hitting Mathis while he was down I believe) After his win over Mathis Savarese won 6 of the last 16 fights, losing to all the name opponents he faced.

Tommy Morrison. known for his stand in front of you slugger style but suspect chin. Had breathing problems and usually by mid rounds was easy pickens for big punchers, similar to Briggs. Easily outboxed Foreman in a one sided sparring match.

Adilson Rodriguez, probably Foreman's best win accomplished fighter, who two fights prior was knocked out by Holyfield in two rounds.

 

Mercer was actually a gold medalist, he won the WBO title from Francesco Damiani in a fight against a relatively untested opponent who I watched him come from behind to beat, and Holyfield was off for a year and more or less on the comeback trail when he became the first man to ever deck Mercer. THe Lewis fight was a good effort.

All of the above is true, however fighting all of the best fighters in the world doesn't change the fact that he was a ring-worn hasbeen who had only won something like 8 of his last 19 fights when he stepped in the ring with Holmes.

Once again, you are talking about past accomplishments. Ribalta fought Tyson in 1986, and mind you, it was a pre-title Tyson who was maybe 19 years old. Ribalta would not fight Holmes until many years later and after again, riding a losing streak.....

I'm seeing a recurring theme here... You're rating opponents based on early career accomplishments and not based on what they were doing at a relevant time pertaining to the discussion. By the way, did you see Tyson vs Smith, and if so do you honestly credit Smith as legitimately BATTLING Tyson to the distance?

A man who has become notorious for his involvement in fixed fights, dives and highly questionable outcomes. That said, I'm not sure that I'd list him as a credible opponent. And robbery or not, this was still no victory for Holmes anyway.

A loss for Holmes and I can vouch for the fact that this was DEFINATELY NOT A ROBBERY.

A nobody at best, and losing to a " comebacking " James Douglas is not very flattering. Why don't you comment on how Lou Savarese proleaxed a "comebacking" Douglas in a single round?

Ok now lets look at Foremans opponents;

Uh, again your numbers are off. Stewart had lost only 3 matches prior to stepping in with Foreman and they were to Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield, and Michael Moorer - 3 past or future heavyweight champions who were all either at or very near PRIME. And never mind the fact that he had Ko'd all of his 28 victims and had a prime Holyfield seeing stars at one point. He was also 27 years old and hardly resembled the cob web gang that Holmes was feasting on.

Using hindsite means nothing. At the time Foreman fought Grimsley, he was undefeated in 20 fights and had KO'd 18 of his 20 opponents. Taking on a man with a track record as a big puncher is hardly what I'd call cherry picking. He was also one of Foreman's last pro fights ever, as George was marching closer and closer to 50 years of age.

Briggs was considered as one of the best young fighters around in 1997 - a time when Foreman was again approaching the age of 50 and in his last pro fight. Most, including myself felt that he had won...

Where are you getting your information from dude?

No worse than losing to Brian Nelson, and had Morrison actually fought rather than run the whole night he would have been left on ***** street.

I think the concensus is that MICHAEL MOORER was the best fighter Foreman beat in his comeback, and incidentally Rodriguez losing to a peak a Holyfield who was blasting everybody in his path at the time was nothing to be ashamed of. Adilson was also a pretty good fighter circa 1990 if you had the chance to see him fight.

 

Lefthook31,

I'm not going to run around pointing fingers and claiming that somebody doesn't know what they're talking about. But, I can say however that my memories of the fighters that you listed, in no way shape or form coincide with yours. Additionally, you made some blatant errors on stats and even factual information about fighters... Also, do you really think that what a fighter did in 1986 has anything to do with what he does against a different opponent in say 1994? If this is the best you can do, fine. We aren't all on the same level knowledge wise here. But, for the love of God please don't waste anymore of my time with these kinds of debate tactics.

 

Michael Moorer, was his biggest win not comebacking win prior to the title shot, but its still hard for me to call it some monumental accomplishment for taking a beating for 10 rounds before landing one punch.
I dont think Holmes lost to Nielson, the fight was a typical european robbery and Nielson had way more overall boxing ability than Morrison ever did.
Mercer went on to more than prove his merit against top opposition, where the fighters Foreman faced did not.

Bottom line comparing past and future accomplishments, the boxing pedigree is far better in Holmes opponents. With exception to Moorer, noone accomplished anything in the division?

 

You're continuing to ignore the fact that Weaver, Ferguson, Smith and Ribalta had no standing in the division at the time Holmes fought them, while Coetzer, Stewart, Rodriguez and savarese were reasonably prominent players. You're also ****ing up statistical information and blowing up Mercer to be far more than he actually was. Its also kind of a cop-out tactic to push the Moorer win asside and only count his other wins on the basis that it was a title victory. If Holmes had beaten Holyfield, I doubt you'd be doing the same....And who cares if Foreman was losing to Moorer before winning? he was 45 years old for Christs sake and hardly predicted to do anything except get cruisified in that match. The fact that he took Moorers best and came back to score a KO is monumental

 

Arent we talking about whose comeback was more impressive? Thats like so many people who discount Holyfields career because he lost to Bowe, Lewis and Moorer. What about the fact his losses were razor close in some of those fights?
Could Holmes have cherry picked certain fighters who were "prominent players" as you said, that matched up well to his style, so that he could pad his record? It does matter, just like a close loss or a miraculous win matters in the context of who was the most impressive. Prominent players quickly turned into nobodies. You have to take into consideration these prominent players future fights.
Holmes fought closer to Holyfield than Foreman (common comebacking opponent)
Holmes beat a better contender to earn his title shot

Holmes competition throughout his comeback past and present and future made more noise in the division than Foreman's did

Holmes fought closer in his losses than Foreman did in his

Thats about as simple as I can put it.

 

1991 Riddick Bowe wins by decision. Prime for prime Holmes knocks Bowe out.

 

In 91/92 I like Bowe. Holmes is still a good boxer but he is not what he once was. I think Bowe win by late round stopage.