Whose "left on table" hurts their legacy most?

Floyd Mayweathers for fighting guys only after someone else beat them.

 

Bit of background.
Johnson fought Jim Johnson on the 19th of December 1913
Langford and Jeannette fought the next day in the same town.Jeannette the marathon fighter stipulated that it be over 20 rds,but he still lost.
Jeannette had beaten Langford in October of that year in MSG the total gate came to $16,000.Jeannette was 195lbs Langford over 199lbs with rolls of fat around his waist and he blew up in the 6th rd.The crowd were less than enthused by the fight.

A month earlier Langford had lost a 12 round decision to GunBoat Smith.Langford was estimated to have weighed about195lbs for the Smith fight and he was described as hog fat..


"Marciano was a young guy fighting old men,I'm an old guy fighting young men" Larry Holmes.

 

Maybe it's just because of what threads I mostly read, but Johnson seems to get brought up the most.

Perhaps Holmes is more damning, a lot of people seem to overlook it.

With Rocky, there's always going to be the odd fighter missed out, is this any more than that.

 

Ohara Davies for fighting Caterall

 

I am not sure it impacts any of thier ratings a great deal? I think Holmes is generally top 6, and comes in 3-4 on my rating. Outside of the occasional comical 16th he rates consistently in this neighborhood. I am not sure these fights would elevate him to top 2 considerations...but maybe...either way I voted Holmes.

 

Holmes avoided Co-Champions as well as top contenders of merit while fighting opponents that lost to them for instance Spinks Leon who was KO'd in 1 round by Coetzzee less than 2 years before. There is many that Holmes avoided during his era but when he stepped up he lost to Spinks and destroyed by Tyson, was it his age or his competetion?

Lets not leave out Lennox Lewis who I think should have rematched Vitali, 1st fight was even and 2nd would have been a great money fight. I know Joe Louis and Ali as well as Marciano and Evander,Tyson & Frazier would have rematched Vitali

 

Why should Lewis have rematches Vitali? I don’t get this line of Reasoning. He would have been 38, and he was in the twilight of his career. He hadn’t looked his best to me in his last 5 fights outside of the Tyson fight perhaps? What would he stand to gain? Would he commit himself to another rigorous camp at 38 or come in undertrained?

Any perceived lead Vitali had on the cards would have evaporated at the end of the round it was stopped in. Even out of shape Lewis was landing the heaviest more consistent blows.

Even if he does not retire why does the champ owe a stopped challenger an immediate rematch?

 

I agree, he knew it was time to retire!

 

Holmes left the most imo

I always felt that I would be able to justify Marciano's placing more if he fought the """Big man with skills""", but hey, whatever. People would find a way to excuse Valdes. If he beat Patterson, people would just say "lol marciano beating up another blown up light heavy" (despite, by that very definition, Marciano being a blown up light heavy too), and Patterson would have a much shorter reign after marciano retires, so he wouldnt be as impressive of a win.

Johnson beat most of those guys before his title reign, so its not toooooo big of a deal for me.

 

I think the fight had its moments both ways, It was Vitali's first fight against a Dangerous Heavyweight and he started off well before the cut but that fight vs Lewis gave him confidence. A rematch would have been a great money fight and Lewis would have had the chance to get in better condition and proved who was the better man. I was always curious to see who would have won without the cut. As a fan I had hoped Lewis did not leave that fight on the table I still think he had a few fights left in him. At 44 fights with a record of 41-2-1 he could have squeezed out another fight against Vitali who went on to crush Kirk Johnson and Vitali went on to fight until he was 41 retiring with a record of 45-2 his brother Vlad also retired at 41 and retired with a 64-5 record & a lively brawl with Joshua. I think had Vlad won he would have given Anthony a rematch....

 

People nitpick at Holmes. They harp on the champions he didn't fight, but never mention those he did fight.

* Ken Norton was the WBC champion. Holmes beat him over 15 rounds.
* Muhammad Ali was the LINEAL champ. Holmes stopped Ali in a WBC title defense.
* Mike Weaver would reign as WBA champ while Holmes was WBC champ. Holmes stopped Weaver in a WBC title defense.
* Tim Witherspoon would win both the WBC and WBA belts while Holmes was IBF champ. Holmes beat Witherspoon in a WBC title defense.
* Trevor Berbick would win the WBC title from Pinklon Thomas. Holmes previously beat Berbick in a WBC title defense.
* Bonecrusher Smith would win the WBA belt by first-round KO over Witherspoon. Holmes previously stopped Bonecrusher in an IBF title defense.

No, he didn't fight Greg Page during the FIVE WHOLE MONTHS Page was a WBA champ.

No, he didn't fight Tony Tubbs during the EIGHT WHOLE MONTHS he was a WBA champ.

No, Holmes didn't fight Michael Dokes or Pinklon Thomas (who were REALLY the only two champs who held the belt for more than one fight who he missed).

But the others who won titles and reigned during his era who he did fight more than make up for it.

As do the top contenders Holmes knocked off, like Gerry Cooney, Earnie Shavers, Carl Williams, Renaldo Snipes, David Bey and even Marvis Frazier (who beat Tubbs, Page and Spoon in the amateurs & Bonecrusher as a pro), who all arguably could've won belts if they'd fought one of the other champs and not Holmes.

Holmes didn't fight EVERYONE. But he fought the vast majority of them. He's a top all-time heavyweight.

Who he didn't fight doesn't hurt his legacy at all.

Holmes beat bigger names and better fighters during his reign than either Marciano or Johnson did during theirs. So if we're comparing the three of them, Holmes certainly wasn't the worst (since most today have Holmes rated higher all-time than either Marciano or Johnson).

 

Dokes and Tubbs could have been trouble for Larry..

 

I nominate Gene Tunney...for calling it quits after just 2 defenses...and against Tom Heeney for the last one for Pete's sake!! I know that Tunney had the brains to do what Joe Frazier didn't do...and that's walk away undefeated as champion...so all I'm asking is maybe he could have put whoopin's on Schmeling and Sharkey at least...

This content is protected

walked alway!!

 

I’m not sure I like any of the options. I don’t know all that much about pre 30s boxing so I don’t want to comment there but Marciano and Holmes to me are both top 5 HWs ever and realistically had nothing to prove. Marciano ducked no one and Valdez realistically wasn’t all that great. He was a good fighter but had his share of losses at that time. Holmes prob could have taken a few fights but the ones he missed also weren’t ATGs or anything (although we were all short changed on no Holmes v Foreman!). I nominate Lennox being that he missed the best fighters of the 90s at their best (not all his fault some guys ducked him) and retired rather then give Vitali a much deserved rematch. Not knocking him great fighter just to me he drops a few spots because of it.