Mike Tyson had a better career than Larry Holmes.

They were already lining up Michael Spinks for that May date as well, but it seems Butch Lewis was smart enough to say Spinks needed more time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[url]https://www.nytimes.com/1985/04/14/sports/sports-people-spinks-balks.html[/url]

April 14, 1985

Michael Spinks, the undisputed light heavyweight champion who has been expected to challenge Larry Holmes for his International Boxing Federation heavyweight title on May 20, has balked at signing for such an early bout, according to his manager, but both Holmes and N.B.C. say that Holmes will fight someone that night. ''We don't know who we'll fight,'' Holmes said yesterday after Spinks's manager,

Butch Lewis, said that a May 20 bout in the heavier weight class would not give Spinks enough time to train for ''the biggest fight of his life.'' N.B.C., which has a contract with Holmes, said it was prepared to go with another opponent.

Dr. Ferdie Pacheo, the director of the network's boxing program, said he had been talking with three potential substitutes for Spinks:

Carl Williams and Tony Tucker, two undefeated young heavyweights, and Frank Bruno, who was defeated last year by James (Bonecrusher) Smith, who was later defeated by Holmes.

 

No, I think Tucker turned down the Holmes opportunity.
Tucker was 27-0 at the time but had faced no one worth mentioning really.

 

I can get behind this.

In regards to point #2, he beat multiple guys who came fresh off of beating men Holmes is accused of avoiding so it sort of cancels itself out.

 

Yes Carl Williams was a 16 fight novice who’s only win was a ring worn Tillis who subsequently had him down twice. He wasn’t considered a serious contender at all

 

Yeah, Holmes was taking challengers who weren't considered much good at the time.
The other options were Tucker and Bruno, who were considered soft touches too.
Michael Spinks.

It turns out Spinks did beat him, and Williams gave him a close fight.
Holmes was 35 years old and I think the schedule he was on left him stale too.

 

Dont back down , you are absolutely right !!! If they do not know his career/his story ,, thats their problem ... the fight was for 2010 , not 2015 ,, if they do not understand it than screw it .. to bring up the age difference for them is RIDICULOUS , it just shows that thats all they have for the true context of the situation ,, and to bring up the Floyd win as a great win against Pac in 2015 ,, just shows ignorance thats all

 

In the spring of 1985 when Holmes fought Williams and Bey, Pinklon Thomas was the WBC champion , Greg Page held the WBA, and Tim Witherspoon was a resurgent contender. Those would have been nice options too.

 

Bey was coming off a win over Page, to be fair.
In fact, if I remember rightly, Page became WBA champion because Bey turned down the chance to challenge Coetzee in apartheid South Africa on moral/political grounds.

 

In other words, I don't think Bey was a lesser challenger than Page, whether Page was WBA champ or not.

 

I can see arguments supporting Bey’s title shot in 1985 being valid due to his win over Page... However, Greg had been in the game a lot longer. Regardless of Bey turning down the Coetzee fight, Page was the one who ventured to South Africa to take that belt. And most importantly, he was the man who Holmes was stripped of a year earlier for refusing to fight. Had he taken on Page in the spring of 1985 ( rather than Bey ) and beaten him along with unifying the IBF and WBA titles it would have been a HUGE redemption on Holmes’ part. Now imagine if AFTER that match he immediately when on to fight Thomas and added the WBC to his collection. NOW let’s suppose after two title unifications against the best fighters in the world, he’s do for a soft defense. NOW he fights David Bey and actually makes 49-0. It would have diminished some of these arguments we’re having today and vastly improved Holmes legacy

 

Some people won't see the inconsistency even if you spell it out for them.

Or they simply refuse to.

The funny thing is if I made a thread in the general forum and said Holmes was a bigger cherry picker than Mayweather they'd be laughing and ridiculing the idea. Which is ironic given that many on that forum hold more modern boxers in high regard.

It's incredible. Holmes fights 8 undefeated fighters younger than him in a 3 year window and then comes out of retirement and continued to fight prime world class big names. Mayweather missed out on an entire generation of prime big names and ignored multiple mandatories but he gets a pass despite retiring at an age even younger than Holmes was in the 90's.

 

None of those undefeated fighters Holmes fought were mandatories or current belt holders. The last undefeated mandatory Holmes fought was Gerry Cooney. From late 1982 to late 1985, Holmes fought Tex Cobb, Lucien Rodriguez, 15 fight Tim Witherspoon, 10 fight Marvis Frazier, Scott Frank, James Smith, 14 fight Bey, 16 fight Williams and Spinks. Not a single one of those fights was against a mandatory nor was a title unification. In contrast Floyd was jumping divisions and beating champions in higher weight classes and continued to do this past the age where Holmes had lost... Case in point, at age 37 Mayweather jumped to Jr. Middle to take on a 42-0 unified world champion in his prime. Now tell WHEN did Holmes ever fight anyone of that complete description at any point in his career, let alone when he was past it ?

What Holmes and Mayweather did can’t even be compared.

 

My point that you kept ignoring was that many of these guys beat the same fighters you accuse Holmes of ducking despite their lack of experience and belts.

Bey beat page, Cooney beat norton, smith beat Bruno, Snipes beat Coetzee, etc. Many of them were ranked in the top 10 and some even went on to become champions or beat the guys you keep hyping up in the 80's. That's why I say you're being inconsistent.

For the third time, Floyd had TWO mandatories in Thurman and Brook who were #1 in the wba and IBF if I recall correctly. Magically the public forgot and now here you are giving him a pass. Don't talk to me about Holmes and then you ignore him ducking literally a whole generation of prime fighters.

You're saying its worse for Holmes to fight guys like smith and Witherspoon because they weren't mandatories than it is for Floyd to ignore #1 contenders?

What Holmes performance compares to Floyd fighting prime canelo? That's easy, when he was a flabby 42 year old and beat a prime undefeated ray Mercer. You can also give him credit for fighting prime undefeated Tyson ad well. And neither of them had a catchweight.