Who were the top 10 heavies during the 80`s

Holmes certainly did not "knock the crap" out of Witherspoon. It was a close fight . Spinks was damaged goods and undersized. Cooney hadn't fought anyone to earn a shot. Berbick went the distance. The Smith tko was on a cut. Leroy Jones was obscure and did little before facing Holmes. Snipes almost stopped Holmes

Holmes also hurt his legacy by opting for easy paydays against Rodriguez, Frazier and Frank then bolting to the IBF because he didn't want to fight the top WBC guys who were controlled by DK and were the best in the division other than Holmes.

Mind you I still put Holmes first and Tyson second but it's not clear cut and kind of a toss up in my eyes - Holmes more quantity while Tyson cleaned out the division, which is something Holmes did not do

 

I boo-boo'd on the Witherspoon in context, you're right, my friend.

I still find it unconvincing Holmes avoided anybody. He was barred from fighting Coetzee due to politics, beat the snot out of David Bey (who beat Page), had already beaten Berbick (who beat Thomas). I understand many members bere don't like that kind of argument, but it is what it is. Page was not really a worthy challenger because he, just like Thomas and Dokes, lost to people they shouldn't have. And I can't hold it against a champ to be more choosy in his latter-day title defenses, most have done that.

You mentioned Rodriguez, Frank, and Frazier, but look at all the contenders and former/future champs Holmes beat during those years. Bey, Williams, Smith, Witherspoon, Spinks, LeDoux...all quite legimitate. Jones was obscure, but ranked.

I also find it impossible to criticize a champ for "almost getting stopped". What happened? He was floored, then got up to pound the yee-haw out of Snipes. He won by TKO. Wow, that looks like a great champ to me. Who did Mike get floored by to get up and come raging back to win? No offense.

To me stopped means stopped. Smith was getting smacked around good at the end by Holmes (it wasn't JUST the cut, Smith was getting his ass handed to him), and Tyson really wasn't able to do that to him (though, to be perfectly fair, Smith fought with great pusillanimity against Mike, his clutching negated ANY kind of real offense).

No disrespect, but if we're criticizing wins, who did Michael Spinks beat at heavyweight who wasn't firmly past his prime, partied out, or completely blah? And most seem to consider that Mike's biggest win. Berbick got miserably dominated by Holmes, so did Smith.

I have to hand it to Mike, though, the wins over Tucker and Tubbs were pretty amazing. Both champs and no joke as fighters. Thomas was already past it a bit, but again a very impressive win for sure. I'm not sure Biggs was ever the same after.

Or maybe I'm still just sticking up for my favorite fighter, hope all can forgive me

 

80's huh? Here's my list

1. Larry Holmes
2. Mike Tyson
3. Tim Witherspoon
4. Pinklon Thomas
5. Mike Weaver
6. Trevor Berbick
7. Tony Tubbs
8. Greg Page
9. Gerrie Coatzee
10. James Smith

p/s Why y'all rank Spinks? He got defeated by Holmes in the rematch, fought less motivated and inactive cooney & little less known steffan tangstad at HW.

 

IMO you might be underrating Tyson's efforts in the 80's, overrating Holmes 80's efforts and struggling to dissociate Holmes 70's and Tyson's 90's.

Cooney beat just one single top 10 (maybe) contender in his life and one on the fringes at that. Berbick was a 50-1 underdog when the fight was made and it was expected to be a routine win for Larry. People were shocked when Berbick went a reasonably competitive 15 even if he lost wide. Tyson destroyed him in 2. Neon had been taken out by Coetzee in 2 minutes and drew with Lopez leading up to the Holmes fight and was actually on the down. Witherspoon beat Holmes in the eyes of some and Williams beat him on plenty of scorecards. Bonecrusher went the distance with Tyson as he hugged all night and never tried to win where as he had a real crack at Holmes. Tyson also stopped Williams in the blink of an eye where as Holmes win was quite controversial. On top of this Tyson annihilated Spinks in 93 seconds where as he beat Holmes twice. When judging resume over the decade allowances aren't given for Holmes being old. He was also knocked cold by Tyson himself.

Tyson unified all the titles which Larry never did and showed real dominance over his opponents and was rarely in trouble. Larry had a couple of close decisions and was on the canvas and in real trouble vs Tim.

Holmes was 16-3 for the decade while Tyson was 37-0. One of Holmes losses was to Tyson by KO and Tyson whupped the guy that beat Holmes x 2. Holmes also had some real filler with guys like LeDoux, Zanon, Frazier, Rodriguez and Frank while missing a handful of big players.

The decade is a no-brainer for me.

 

You can't just say becuz Tyson whooped all the guys that Larry fought doesn't mean he's better than Holmes. Style makes fight you stupid no brainer. Does that mean Norton is better than Foreman and Frazier becuz He gave Ali more trouble? NO! h2h fight and p4p achievements are different. Here's an example: Tim Witherspoon, Pinklon Thomas & Greg Page TKO'd James Tilis while Tyson went the distance with him, does that mean all three of them is better than Tyson? No right? Larry and Tyson both have polar opposite styles that's why all the fighters that Larry find hard usually is stylistically ez for Tyson.

You discredit Larry's win over Cooney? Who was at his best condition at the time but you credit Tyson for winning against that old scared Spinks and Larry Holmes who just came out of 2 years of retirement & fought on short notice? Yeah, make sense...

 

Well if that's your take home point from what i posted heaven help us all.

Really? You are going to make such a difference around here with such amazing and unique insight.

Man you really know your boxing. Such out of the box thinking too.

Yes Tyson sure found Holyfield ez.

Well i said "Cooney beat just one single top 10 (maybe) contender in his life and one on the fringes at that". Prove me wrong big boy, prove me wrong

Spinks had never been beaten so you can stop that rot right now thanks very much. He even beat yo man Cooney who was on a 3 fight knockout streak!!!!! :O

Yes Larry was old etc etc but when summing up their 80's resumes it counts somewhat. Holmes went on to beat a contender thereafter and had a couple of decent performances. If one was summing up Tyson's 90's resume against that of someone else his losses to Douglas, Holyfield and co would certainly go against him regardless of perceived shape against say Douglas or time lost in jail etc

 

You know that Cooney fought bums right? two at 1984 one at 1986. His 3 fight winstreak proves nothing... You're right about Cooney beating bums early in his career and no one is gonna prove you wrong dumbass. I never thought Spinks was successful in Heavyweight, even Gerry Cooney who came a YEAR later after his "3 win KO streak" was able to put up a good fight with him. An old more focus Holmes was able to beat him just like Ali did to his brother. Beating the **** outta Spinks is not impressive at all

 

Apart from an aged fringe Jimmy Young that was what Cooney always did right?

Spinks was successful at heavyweight because he beat Holmes, who tho declined and facing less dangerous opponents than some was still clinging to the belt with no shortage of heart and guile. He was still quite a hard beat. I'm well aware Cooney didn't fight for a year going into the Spinks bout but you are obviously unaware he did the same going into the Holmes fight as well. Study up buttercup.

Cooney was a good win, he had huge power and Holmes beat him quite impressively but in the washup Cooney never amounted to much at all. Thomas, Page, Witherspoon, Berbick and co may have had some losses but they were all beating top 5 contenders where as Gerry never did.

 

John, don't get drawn into the name calling. You're too good for that. You've made your point well and clear, he's just trying to drag you into a silly, fallacious ad hominem argument.

 

This is a tough one. In no particular order

Tyson (destroyed most of the guys on this list)
Holmes (no explanation needed)
Spinks (Dethroned Holmes)
Douglas(wins over Page, Berbick, McCall, Cobb)
Witherspoon (Wins over Bruno, Tubbs, Bonecrusher, Broad, Page, Tillis, Snipes, Ratliff)
Page (wins over broad, coetzee, snipes, Tillis, evangelista, ledoux)
Dokes (wins over Rodriguez, Ocasio, Cobb, Weaver)
Berbick (wins over Tate,Page, Bey, Mitch Green, Pinklon Thomas)
Pinklon Thomas (wins over weaver, Spoon, Tillis)
Evander Holyfield (brief time he was there in 80s defeated Thomas, Dokes, Rodrigues, Tillis, Alex Stewart)

Just outside top ten and arguments can be made
Weaver, Snipes, Tubbs, Williams, Cooney, Tucker, Coetzee

 

Tyson
Holmes
Witherspoon
Spinks

The rest really are interchangeable due to drug hapbit, non-efforts, etc, but...

Pinklon Thomas
Tony Tubbs
Tony Tucker
Greg Page
Trevor Berbick
Michael Dokes

 

80s is crazy. JohnThomas put Dokes on #3, then at the next list he´s missing completely. Same for Michael Spinks. I´d say it again, distance of these fighters is too close to make a list. 80s deserve a top 20 list and include them all

 

Re: Cooney opponent rankings. I've got Ring's monthly rankings. By that time the WBA and WBC were unreliable. Young was #10 in April 1980, but had slipped to #12 in May when he fought Cooney. Lyle was unranked. Norton was #9. Brown, Chaplin, and Gregg were all unranked. The Gregg win did not push him back into Ring's top-15, so he was unranked going in against Ring recognized champ Michael Spinks.

 

Great stuff mate.

 

Remember JohnThomas didn't put Dokes anywhere the KO Magazine did. Having said that he wouldn't be top #3 for me no.