Nah. Holmes just did w/e the f*ck he wanted. Which didn't include fighting those two. I think Thomas would have been a v nice scalp for him though.
These men are professionals they don't get scared in the traditional sense, but they do weigh options, risks,..etc. Holyfield admited to ducking Chris Byrd and wanting nothing to do with him until he had to fight him for a title, was it because he was scared that Byrd was going to knock him out of the ring, or because he knew he was going to have a hard's night work and could end up looking very bad? And of course, Holyfield was right.
I think ducking has very little to do with that unless you think Jack Dempsey was terrified of a guy he like a half foot taller than and outweighed by 20 or 30 pounds. But sometimes these fights just don't make sense. Roy Jones didn't need to leave America and fight Dariusz Michalczewski so he didn't. Duran didn't need to fight Antonio Cervantes so he didn't. Chang and Yuh were on different channels and sometimes that's enough.
But Thomas only drew with Coetzee after Weaver Knocked out Coetzee. then Thomas knocked out Weaver. See what I mean? You cant tell even when they did fight each other because all of them would flunk their next fight. There wasn't enough good wins in any of them but Holmes. One step forward and two steps back. And it's the same with the entire cast of the "lost generation". Was Thomas any better than weaver if he could only draw with Coetzee? or was Thomas better because he actualy beat Weaver? Where did that put Berbick since he beat Thomas.... but lost to Snipes and Holmes? How about Bonecrusher? He knocks out Weaver and Witherspoon in the first round....but lost to Marvis Frazier. My conclusion is they were all good fighters who kept losing to guys who lost to men they already beat. With that kind of form all you can say is on a good night they might give Holmes trouble but you have no chance of predicting when that good night could be because most of them were the boxing equivalent of a one hit wonder in the music charts. Does Holmes look good because he never fought them? Or do they look good because Holmes did not get to fight them?
I know what you want it to mean. Another valid interpretation of the above is that Thomas was not eliminated by that line of results and so should have been matched. And yet i've seen you on this forum espousing Marciano's virtues for fighting Charles even though Charles had been beaten Valdes and Johnson only months before. You want to sort of imply that Thomas wasn't a valid opponent because he got a draw (or something) whilst insisting that Charles was a valid opponent despite back-to-back losses. But it doesn't really matter.
[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1119601/2/index.htm[/url] It was the seventh time Weaver had been stopped early in 39 fights. But it was the first time he had ever been knocked out by a single punch. For [url]Thomas[/url] it was knockout No. 21, and it established him as the next legitimate opponent for [url]Larry Holmes[/url]. But this is boxing, and [url]Holmes[/url], who is chasing [url]Rocky Marciano[/url]'s record of 49 successful title defenses, has said he wants no part of [url]Thomas[/url]. That was before the Weaver fight. And it stayed that way after the Weaver fight unforunately as Holmes took Spinks for his next opponent and the rest is history.
The guy that you say Coetzee drew with that drew with Frank was Renaldo Snipes (Snipes put Holmes down HARD ) and Coetzee dropped Snipes 2 X and King had that decision rigged for Snipes...so Snipes who was on the floor 2X got the shot vs Holmes...add that to Leon Spinks getting KO'd by Coetzee in 1 rd and Spinks getting the title shot 2 years later Weaver got a lift after the Holmes fight and gained belief in himself, he began to train and had an almost 3 year run with wins over Tate,Coetzee and Tillis before King set him up with the Dokes Hokey dokey...That would have been a dynamite unification and rematch... Thomas was highly thought of and a match with Holmes was sought after but Holmes knew certain styles would be hard and some easy Page had fast hands, a solid chin and had a good sneaky oddball right hand but Page was erratic and did not always train but Holmes still gave up a title not to fight him. These were not fights Holmes or King wanted to make
Thanks for pulling up those articles refreshes my memory to the Holmes avoidance's and King shenanigans ....Larry never unified,gave up a title not to fight Page, Never rematched a tough fight and navigated around the opponents that would possibly be a problem for him style wise but we have a lot of guys who study boxrec and do not know the color of the era I dont have a hard on for Holmes as some suggest in fact as a fan and a better I wanted to see the best and most interesting fights. I usually can tell when someone will have trouble with a certain style (I am not always right but have had many successes with my picks & bets) but the truth is the truth, Holmes avoided the tougher fights of his era and too many of them to be called a coincidence
Yes it doesn't really matter. I still think Charles rebounding with two exciting, high profile wins over names like Coley Wallis and bob satterfeild after the close loss to Johnson (could have went either way) and decission loss to valdes was a lot more than what Thomas did between his draw and title shot. Leroy Boone? Bruce Grandham? Charles had proven pedigree and was back on track. Pinky had not got going. Just another 1980s prospect by comparison. That's not to say I did not think Thomas looked a very good fighter against Witherspoon and Tillis. He did look like he Could make the grade. It would have been very intresting against Holmes. but looking back, with hindsight, it's just two good fights.
Yeah, I know you do. Your point of view varies widely from fighter to fighter depending upon how you feel about them. Charles loses twice, he's a good opponent. Thomas draws once, he's a bad opponent.
The question isn't about Thomas deserving his title shot against Spoon. This is matter of Thomas beating #1 rated WBC Champion Spoon to establish himself as the top guy behind Holmes only to be passed over in favor of the upstart Carl Williams and the underdog Spinks who had not fought above 175 his entire carer. In that time Thomas KOed Weaver as well, an excellent win as Weaver's only loss since Holmes was the controversial Dokes match.
Why would you want this article Bummy .. it states Thomas was on top of his game ... he would then lose to Berbick and you're on record saying he was damaged goods when he lost to Berbick. How many ways can you try to have it ?
And didn't Holmes look good in the David Bey fight? I have never seen that fight, but I remember reading a few descriptions of the Holmes-Bey fight, and from what I remember, they mentioned how good and revitalized Holmes looked (relative to how he looked in the Williams and Bonecrusher fights). So if that's the case, one could argue that Holmes really hadn't slipped all that much since his prime. But like I said, I have yet to watch that fight.
Yes I am aware of that angle. Coetzee should have been rewarded with a shot at Holmes right after he beat spinks in 79'. Of all the wins of that time that deserved a Holmes crack it was that one. Cooney and SHavers were granted shots for something simular. Snipes also got the nod over Berbick and was a bit lucky. Renaldo was also a bit unlucky against Witherspoon. The point is, there often was not much between them. Snipes fought Berbick and witherspoon and they were close fights. Berbick beat Thomas easier by comparison. It would have made a great rematch but I understand why it did not happen. Holmes did knock weaver down and stopped him legitimately. As tough as it was it was only suposed to be a tune up for Larry's SHavers rematch, that fight was made before Holmes fought weaver. Most of 1980 was a countdown for Holmes v Ali. I am not sure weaver made much improvement because whilst Larry took some easy fights to keep busy weaver went the distance with one of them ledoux and Holmes stopped him. In 1980, once weaver beat Tate, Coetzee was a big money fight for Weaver while the Holmes v Ali fight was made. After a full year out Weaver fought Tillis in oct 1981 the year Holmes beat Berbick, spinks and Snipes. The next year weaver only fought one time when Dokes beat him. Holmes fought twice, Cooney being the biggest fight that year. In 1982 nobody wanted Weaver v Holmes II rather than a Holmes v Cooney fight. There is truth in that of course, sometimes the politics is a convenient obstacle. However, apart from doing a better points job on Witherspoon it was not yet quite sensational enough to demand anything that urgent. It was not like he knocked out witherspoon. Thomas already looked good enough to be a genuine #2 to Holmes but I think he had more to prove. If the money and demand was big enough to force a showdown perhaps they could have fought. I just think on the face of it bey, smith and williams had about the same credentials as Thomas had when he first challenged for a title. Page kind of wound up with a title unexpectedly.
you are forgetting the knockout weaver suffered after the bell against Tony Anthony in his previous fight. I remember it well because it was on the Holmes v Smith card. Weaver was badly hurt by a shot on the bell and drunkenly totered to his corner only for Anthony to come up behind and waste Weaver after the bell. It was DQ of course but it was still a KO. weaver could not continue. Years later something simular happened to Ray mercer by another obscure opponent. Weaver did not come out of that looking like hot stuff.