Who has a better resume, Wladimir Klitschko or Larry Holmes?

Listen...both beat Ray Mercer...but Klitschko knocked him out.

 

I'd be surprised if any poster had a HW all time top 100 as thoroughly researched as our own McGrain's is.

Of the fighters on that list, Wlad and Holmes, between them, beat

#1 Ali - LH
#22 Norton - LH
#34 Witherspoon - LH
#50 Byrd - WK x 2
#68 Mercer - LH and WK
#73 Weaver - LH x 2
#74 Rahman - WK
#95 Cooney - LH

Lets discount the Ali, Weaver 2, the Mercer Wlad beat and Rahman fights, as they were shot.

That's 5 x 2 to Holmes and Holmes has the best 2 wins.

That top 100 was published in 2014, since when some of the guys Klitschko beat added to their legacy. However, I suspect the only other guy he beat who has sufficiently since added to their legacy, to get into a top 100 all time, would be Povetkin, who would still rank below Witherspoon.

So, 5 vs 3 Holmes. Top 2 wins to Holmes. Not much in it, but Holmes edges it. Which reflects my own view nicely.

 

You are leaving out Povetkin and Haye for Klitschko. I would rate Povetkin above Byrd, who in fact stopped Byrd albeit Byrd at the end of his career. But Holmes stopped Ali at the end of his career (and Ali was definitely suffering from Parkinson's at that point, go watch Muhammed and Larry ESPN 30 for 30 if you don't believe me) as well and I don't think that is a great win for Holmes.

This is a difficult to determine because I think both guys fought in weak eras and also came up short against the better fighters they faced (Holmes against Holyfield and Tyson; Klitschko against Joshua and Fury). Both also lost to opponents they shouldn't have (Klitschko to Sanders, Purrity and Brewster; Holmes to Spinks, Witherspoon was also a pretty questionable win).

I would give it slightly to Klitschko but it really all depends on how you rate their opponents. I know Norton beat Ali but that was a style thing and just about every puncher ran right through him. I don't think he would have beaten Wlad, in fact he would have got knocked out IMO. And Holmes losing to a career LHW is probably just as bad as Klitschko's losses to some of his weaker opposition. I think on the whole, Klitschko comes out ahead ever so slightly.

 

If you read my entire post closely you'll see I - 1) Discounted the Ali win; 2) Mentioned Povetkin and included him in my 5 vs 3 in favour of Holmes analysis.

Only Mcgrain could confirm or deny this, but I doubt Haye would make his top 100 at HW.

You're correct I didnt mention losses. Holmes didnt lose in his physical prime, whilst Wlad did x 3 (I accept Wlad got better after these losses).

Wlad over Holmes is defensible, but I'm comfortable with Holmes being ahead on my rankings.

 

Holmes all day long . Got up of the floor and won. That's a champion

 

I think it's close so either one you pick is fine IMO. But I would say Holmes was in his physical prime against Spinks (he was 35 right?) and that is a worse loss than any of the Klitschko losses. At least Wlad's were losses to legit HWs, not a LHW.

 

Yeah so has Wlad. And only one of those guys was ever on his back and out when the ref called off the fight.

I actually think their resumes are close but I find it humorous and baffling that this poll is tilting so much in Holmes favor. Especially when you throw in Wlads amateur accomplishments too considering that counts as The Whole Body of work.

Gerry Cooney was boxed up and put out by 205lb Spinks. I am pretty sure guys like Haye, Ibragimov, prime Byrd and Povetkin could beat Cooney and also the majority of Holmes MURDERERS ROW in those 20 defenses

But hey, it is what it is. If so many actually think Holmes resume is better then that’s their right.



I would be curious to know the wins/losses comparisons of both Wlad and Larry’s opponents though. Just outta sheer curiosity

 

Holmes is #3 on my all time HW list and Wlad #7. Theres a clear difference in my view, but it's not huge.

I think most people would consider 35 as past physical prime. Wlad, was 28 when losing to Brewster, smack bang in the middle of his natural physical prime. Though, again, I accept he improved as a boxer after that fight.

 

Holmes, and it is not even close.

 

Also true and that says something about how thin Wlad’s record is.

 

Klitschko by far.

 

It’s very disingenuous to say that a prime Wlad wouldn’t have been beaten by a 205 pound Spinks.

Larry wasn’t prime for those fights, and Spinks would have been one of Wlad’s best opponents.

Wlad also lost to lesser fighters than Spinks, in a career which saw him get dropped 13 times.

 

In one of the weakest.

He couldn’t have reigned 10 plus years across the 70’s, 80’s or 90’s.

 

Of course it’s close.

 

An old version of Larry beat a prime Mercer.

Whereas, a prime Wlad beat an old, faded version of Mercer.