Marvis Frazier discussion

I'm not as impressed as some of you are of Marvis as a Heavyweight.
......the problem was that he did'nt have the speed or the power for a smaller man to compete against the better Heavyweights who were'nt mollases slow.

......and he did'tn have the chin either......Larry Holmes in not a puncher, and Marvis went down hard from a Holmes right hand, and then was physically manhandled by Holmes right after.

The thread starter is absolutely correct. Marvis would have done better today as a 200 lbs cruiserweight.

 

I just can't get that picture of Larry Holmes all but begging the ref to stop the fight out of my head. I know that's really not fair to Marvis, but that is the first thing that comes to mind when I see his name in print.

 

That's better than me always thinking of Tyson uppercutting Marvis Frazier's boxing career into the third row.

 

Marvis was a good amatuer, he was an experienced amatuer, spending so much time in the gyms but was hurt in his last amatuer fight against Broad. They were concerned about a nerve in his neck. Then he went on as a pro and beat some decent fighters in a short career but Marvis never showed heavyweight power and did get shaken up a few times and his fight against Holmes and Tyson kind of (I hate to use the word "exposed" his amatuer INJURY)...any way 10 pro fights is just not enough...Leon Spinks had 5-0-1 record when he faced ALI AND A 10-2-2 RECORD WHEN HE FACED HOLMES (just getting ko'd in1 rd by COETZEE) I know Pete Radamaker only had 1 fight but all of them had amatuer experience. Still I think a fighter needs pro experience despite his amatuer back ground. The pros are another learning experience. Frazier was rushed but if he did not fight Holmes he would have been KO'd anyway and Holmes at least was the most skilled but the least of the punchers that had titles. Marvis was going out quick vs POWER