Teofilio Stevenson vs Larry Holmes 1980

It is difficult to project how Teofilio Stevenson was going to do in the professional ranks, especially in 10-round or 12-round bouts, based on the scheduled three-round bouts that he had as an amateur. To make such a projection would be similar to projecting how Mariano Rivera would have done as a starting pitcher in Major League Baseball based on what he did as a closer.

- Chuck Johnston

 

Stevenson probably gets outclassed. Larry Holmes was an exceptional fighter. He wasn't John Tate. Different levels here.

Look at it this way..it was Larry Holmes.

 

Stevenson under amateur rules, Holmes under pro rules.

 

Holmes kills him

 

Holmes dices him up after a few careful, surgical rounds ..

 

This is an interesting fight to analyse, despite the obvious difficulties in that Teofillo is completely unknown and Larry was an ATG so really, he must be the favourite. Obviously if Teofillo were to win, it would probably be the greatest effort/upset in the history of the sport but still, an analysis is interesting. The year of the fight really is one of the key issues with this fight.

First thing to remember is that amateur boxing was not like today back then. Three rounders were exactly that. Three round fights.

In 1971 Duanne Bobick actually beat Teofillo on points in a 3 rounder. But in the 1972 Olympics, Teofillo stopped him in the 3rd rounds at the Olympics. Duanne also defeated Larry Holmes in 1972. His amateur career was actually really good which shows just hard these predictions are to make. Still, i think the difference is that the communist system kept Teofillo training and focussed. Duanne had a very good record Despite Norton and Knoetzee stopping him very early (much like Teofillo was stopped). It is interesting that one of Teofillos biggest stoppage wins was against a guy who did seem to cave early to the first class hitters. Does this mean that Teofillo's power was top notch (for a pro) on the level of world class talents like Norton and Knoetzee or was Bobick's chin glass? I tend to think it does show that there is a good chance Teofillo could be included in the world class stage, even at this early stage.

IN 1973, Holmes fought about half a dozen fights of 4 -6 rounds, though 2 of these went less than 3 rounds. The opponents were probably a lower level than what Teofillo fought that year, although maybe they were similar it is hard to say.Tefillo fought 8 fights (from boxrec). Interestingly, Vysotsky actually beat Teofillo, so arguably, in 1973 there is a good argument that he was better than both at this point in time. From a development point of view, i think tha tthis would be a pick em fight by the end of 1973 in terms of odds.

In 1974, Teofillo won a world championship and big tournaments against mostly South American fighters. He also did so with many stoppages along the way. Holmes had 3 fights for a total of 12 rounds. At this point, i think that Teofillo probably would have been a slight favourite if they fought. Both were training full time. I do assume that Larry had access to better sparring opponents but to counter, i dare say that the communist system may have encouraged more discipline and devotion.

In 1975, Holmes had a big year with around 10 fights. Although some fights didnt even go the 3 round distance, there were some good hard and long fights and he went up to 10 rounds in one fight and several others went over 6 rounds, which is double the distance that Teofillo ever went. The same year, Boxrec lists Teofillo as having about 8 fights. Michael Dokes is the best win, and (with hindsight) Dokes would go on to be better than anyone Holmes had fought. Teofillo only beat Dokes on points, but won on all 5 judges cards (i think that is how the scoring was done). Intereestingly though, Teofillo did start the year the year with a loss to fellow Cuban Adolpho Galdez. Galdez is very interesting because he is actually 2 and 0 against Teofillo but these are his only two fights listed. Does anyone know anything about him? it is strange that everyone mentions Vysotsky, but i had never even heard of Adolpho before. I presume that Teofillo has many unrecorded victories against him but still it is interesting that he is never really mentioned. Realistically, this is the fairest year for any fight between the two fighters. I think that Teofillo would probably still start as slight favourite, but there would be legitimate arguments for Larry to be considered the better fighter. i think it is a toss up.

1976 sees Larry with just 3 fights, but they are all good wins where he is gaining lots of pro experience. ON the other side of teh coin, Teofilo had his big olympics win where he defeated Tate in the semi's and Mircea Simon ( a Canadian who had already beaten Trevor Berbick and who was actually undefeated as a professional but never really stepped it up to world class level with a draw with Eddie Lopez his best result) in the finals. It is an interesting contrast. The Olympics is definitely a tough tournament to win, particularly a second one. I would back Holmes to win the Olympics in 76 but it isnt guaranteed. I would also back Teofillo to beat Holmes opposition but it isnt guaranteed either. One think to consider is Teofillos stoppage loss early in the year to Vysotsky. This must be a worry to any Teofillo fan. It is tough to say, but from an odds perspective, i think that it would be an even money affair. As with 75, this would be when you would want the fight (maybe even moreso). A two time olympic champion and national hero vs an undefeated and unproven up and coming fighter. I think Larry edges it against a fighter who would probably underestimate him and have one eye on meeting an aging undisputed great champion in Muhammed Ali. (ironically, looking at Teofillo's record, he could easily lose the holmes fight in say 76or a bit, like he did to vysotsky but go on to win a few fights and defeat Ali in say 1978 or so and then pass the loss off as a tune up fight to the ultimate goal of winning a world championship)

From 1977 to 1980, Larry Holmes really started to step up his quality of opponent. There were good hard fights against world class opponents. In the same Time frame, Teofillo continued to win but he was fighting the same quality of opponent as he did for the previous 8 years and, in reality, his Olympic win has a big aserisk in that he didnt meet the best of the US heavyweights. I think Holmes becomes a big favourite through this period.

Still, what is being proposed here is something which has never really been done before. An all time great fighter against a three time olympic Champion on debut. Still, surprisingly it almost has. Floyd Patterson is considered an all time great by many people (though not usually quite as good as Larry Holmes) and Pete Rademacher did fight him, in his prime, on debut, as the Olympic champion.

When Floyd defended, he was a young champion, like Holmes was in 1980. Rademacher is a strange one. He has the olympics win in 1956, but he doesnt have any recorded fights between 52 and 56. I dont know if this was simply because he didnt fight for a lot of this time, or he simply didnt qualify for the olympics or any major tournaments that would have been recorded. None of his opponents from the olympics really went on to make anything of his career. The only name on his record i noticed was Zora Folley, which was actually a loss. Folley actually knocked Rademacher out in his second fight. Rademacher went on to defeat Chuvalo and Besmanoff among others, but he was usually knocked out when he fought a world class fighter with Brian London and Doug Jones being among those who knocked him out. I dont think it is fair to compare Rademacher with Teofillo Stevenson. Teofillo won 3 olympics, not one. And the quality of opponent he beat was a lot better than Rademacher's even allowing for the early stage of their careers.

Still, the Rademacher fight is an interesting one. Rademacher actually knocked down Patterson, and in reality would have been declared the winner after three rounds, if it was Olympic rules. You would have to say that in the same situation Teofillo at worst could have done the same, but in all likelihood, i think he might have actually stopped Floyd. Rademacher faded after three rounds. The question is whether Teofillo would do the same. Common sense says yes, but there are no guarantees. Youd think he might be better trained and conditioned than Rademacher. And you would think his power might take more of a toll on Patterson which would slow patterson down more. Beating Larry Holmes, as opposed to Floyd, i think is a step up again, but it might not be quite as insurmountable as it seems at first glance. I dont see any realistic way to conclude that Teofillo would beat Larry in this time frame, but it is not impossible. I think it all depends on his chin and heart holding up, because we simply do not know how he would react to extreme difficulties and you never know this in a fighter until he is tested properly (and Teofillo never was). But, if we assume that his chin and heart is at, say Larry Holmes level, then this is one hell of a fight and Teofillo has one hell of a chance.

 

Why is Stevenson discussed amongst pros?
Holmes with ease, not sure why it needs to be explained.

 

Stevenson knew his place, milking the the amateur system for all it's worth, wisely bowing out of turning pro & tarnishing his amateur legacy

 

This would be a fight against a grown man with experience. Not amateur kids, Stevenson was great against thet opposition. I saw what they did to Jimmy Clark when he basically had Stevenson's number. It was bull****. Will that work against an all time great champion? With experience?
It doesn't go the distance.

 

Larry Holmes all day long ..... it’s not a 3 rd fight in the pros !!!? And Larry Holmes wasn’t 17 yrs old in 1980 like the guys Stevenson beat in the amateurs !! He beat a 17 yr old Michael dokes ..

 

Stevenson was a man among boys in the amateurs. He probably is the greatest amateur heavyweight in boxing history.
His game was built around the amateurs and his power , experience, and longevity gave him a unique advantage over most he faced at that level.
But the pro game is a different animal. Personally I don't believe he would've been a great pro.
Their have been dozens of ATG amateurs who's fight game didn't mesh at the pro level. Though some had success. It was nothing compared to what was expected of them. ( Davis Jr. Breland, C.Jackson, R.Seales step on up. )
If they actually fought I see Holmes taking his time, using that jab to keep Stevenson at bay, controlling the distance behind it.
After the 5th or 6th rd Holmes would began to realize Stevenson is stiff, fighting upright, he'd began to add the right hand with bad intentions after the jab and began to connect easily on a tiring and reluctant Stevenson.
Between the 7th or 10th rd, The ref stops the contest. After A one sided drubbing by Holmes since the 6th rd.
Holmes exposes Stevenson as a average heavyweight in the pro ranks.

 

Holmes destroys him