Let's talk about Larry Holmes

Definitely. With barely a nice word to say about anyone, ever.

 

This content is protected

 

I pretty much concur with everything you say here. Like yourself, I could certainly appreciate the type of fighter that Larry was, but our opinions are not in congruency with the concencus. Holmes sometimes failed to meet the best challengers, and at times looked dull or unimpressive against the fighters he did meet. Of course, the Weaver, Cooney, and Shavers fights were definately exciting to watch.

Although I never particularly cared for Tyson as a person, he was interesting and fun to watch for the brief time that his prime lasted.

 

Good post

 

Well JT, that's what happpens sometimes, when one gets up in the wee morning hours, and posts drowsy stream-of-consciousness commentary in an effort to fall asleep again. (Stick around mate, as I'm sure I'm be yawning out plenty of doozies until I somehow manage to bring my insomnia under control.) Thanks for the offer.

Personally, I consider Mike Weaver to have been the number two heavyweight from his road win over Scott LeDoux in November, 1979(retroactively), until his loss to Pinklon Thomas in June 1985. (Obviously, I have a strong bias in favor of Weaver's quiet dignity, class and persistence. His ambushing of "The Truth" immediately after the Thomas loss was one of the shrewdest traps I've ever seen sprung in the ring.) After Dynamite's gift draw against Ocasio, gift stoppage win over Weaver, and subsequent gift draw over Hercules, there was simply no way I could consider Dokes as the number two heavyweight myself (especially after Weaver victim Coetzee took out Dokes on Featherfist's home turf). However, many others did consider Dokes as the number two heavyweight while he remained officially undefeated.

 

That's why i highlighted it for you. Dokes was about 4 really at the time you state. Fully agree he was a bit overrated in some ways tho, i mean excepting the Weaver rubbish who was the best he beat he beat?

 

There were also a few who felt he was low on the totem pole, behind Cooney and Page.

 

He was actually rated behind Coetzee right at the time too truth be told.

 

I have to agree with Both Deen and John on this one. Although I respect Dokes for being a tough fighter with a fair amount of ability, his resume and overall career accomplishments are a bit tainted. Early on , he won close decisions or draws, with men like Ocasio, Young, Rodriguez, Weaver and Cobb. His win over Hercules was possibly one of the worst stoppages in the 80's, and the rematch resulted in a draw that some felt possibly could have gone the other way. Not long after, he was knocked out by Coetzee whom several of Dokes' peers managed to get wins against. All the while, he was using drugs, and not showing up in ideal condition for a top 3 or 4 fighter. From about 1987-1990, Dokes stayed fairly drug-free, and was working with a better team of managers and trainers. He was fighting often against average comp, but staying active nontheless. His losing effort to Evander Holyfield was likely the best performance that I've ever seen him give. I don't know if he was a better fighter per say in 1989 then he was in 1983, but let's just say he was no worse given the changes of his career circumstances. Dokes probably should have called it quits a year later after Ruddock dispatched him in 4. I truely believe that it was the end of the line for him.

 

Excellent post. Just on the Dokes - Weaver rematch, the vast majority scored it by 1 or 2 points to Weaver. It's funny, tho very close after 15 rounds most everyone went the same way. One of the easier "close" fights to score i think. At the end of the day nobody can tell me Dokes was a better fighter than Weaver.

 

After the first few rounds, it looked like Cobb put a scare in Dokes.He could barely hold him off.

 

I agree full heartedly.

Weaver's career accomplishments far outweigh that of Dokes. He defeated far more ranked men, and gave better efforts in some of his losing battles. He also stayed in shape for most of his fights-a problem which plagued Dokes for many years.

 

Well, this would certainly be a dull forum if we were continually in lockstep consensus all the time. (Besides, I've been finding myself growing rather dependent on your thoughtful challenges to the views I've expressed.)

 

Hercules also remained competitive for a long time. He knocked off undefeated Bill Sharkey in early 1977, and decisioned 27 year old Smokin' Bert Cooper over 12 rounds in early 1993. (In Bert's previous two defeats, a peak undefeated Holyfield and Moorer had to recover from knockdowns to beat him.) Dokes and Smith both stopped Hercules in a single round, yet he came back in rematches to go the distance with both, a remarkable achievement. (Imagine Patterson lasting through 15 rounds with Liston in their rematch.) Weaver was always worth watching, because any outcome was feasible with him competing.

 

I think Holmes vs Ali is a toss up. Fighters with good jabs always have trouble with fighters that can match their jab. Plus Holmes being the same size as Ali, plus the jab scenario, causes a match up problem for Ali. Liston might have a slight edge over Holmes, matching his jab but having good power in both hands may give him an edge. I think Fraizer eats Holmes alive, I don't think Larry could deal with Fraizers applied pressure. Foreman vs Holmes, I don't know. One would think Holmes due his jab, but I keep remembering how Shavers and Snipes dropped Holmes like a bag of sand.