why did Larry Holmes never once try and unify?

Yeah, but the thing is that at the time, not everyone was convinced that he won the fights against Norton and Witherspoon. Yes, history has been revised so that everyone says "I had it close but clearly for Holmes..." but it wasn't the case at the time.

 

There’s a story from the Apollo astronaut days when America was trying to put a man on the moon that illustrates this.

One of the astronauts (I forget which) was given an assignment to go to Washington and schmooze some politicians. He said he had more important things to do in Houston to get ready for his upcoming flight and the trip would be a waste of time.

The administrator in charge of the program told him he needed to go to Washington, and asked the astronaut, ‘Do you know what makes this rocket fly?’

The astronaut started into an explanation about propellant and thrust and the physics of rocketry.

The administrator interrupted: “No. Funding is what makes the rockets fly. No bucks, no Buck Rogers.”

The astronaut went to Washington because schmoozing politicians was part of what was needed to get the funding.

HBO, in this case, provided the funding. No HBO money, no unification series to bring the belts together. And Tyson was the linchpin — they were creating a star who would make them money. You notice HBO never said ‘Hey, we’ve got millions; how about let’s get Tony Tubbs and Tim Witherspoon and Berbick and all these guys and have a unification series!’ Because nobody would have cared.

 

Not everybody was convinced Norton beat Jimmy Young. Yet I’ve never heard him criticized for not rematching Young.

Tim has some close fights too. He beat Page by majority decision for the WBC belt. Didn’t give him a rematch. Then Pinklon beat Tim narrowly, and didn’t give him a rematch. Pinklon had recently had a draw with Coetzee but didn’t offer him a rematch for the title.

Why is it only Holmes who is supposed to be handing out rematches?

 

Because Holmes was the champ, and the others weren't.

 

And he was promoted by the promoter that could put heavyweight bouts better than anyone. And he also promoted most of the guys Holmes did not fight.

Just go and look at the guys he fought instead. And just who out there was giving any of those guys a chance. He cleaned out the division the way Patterson/Valuev/Wilder did. Lots of defenses and lots of optimal safe opponents.

 

Norton beat Young for the same championship he lost to Larry.

Spoon became the champ by beating Page in a close fight. And lost it in a close fight to Pinklon, who didn’t offer a rematch.

I could give hundreds of examples. Salvador Sanchez narrowly beat Patrick Ford, no rematch. Marvin Hagler eeked it out vs. Duran, no rematch. Hagler in a war with Mugabi, no rematch (yes he stopped him but Holmes stopped Weaver and some on this thread seem to think Weaver should have gotten a rematch — yet no one asks why Weaver didn’t give John Tate another shot).

 

Certainly a valid question, but he got terrifyingly knocked out by Berbick not too long after.

 

Norton was already duty bound to fight Holmes as his win over Shavers was an eliminator for next shot at the title which had been gifted to Norton when Ali and Spinks did their own thing. Norton lost to Holmes and never had a title again so that was that. Young was in line for a shot at Holmes but lost not once but twice to Ocasio or he would have got his title shot vs Holmes.

To be fair Page - Witherspoon and Thomas - Witherspoon were nothing like Holmes fights as nobody scored things for Page or Thomas and neither decision was controversial in the least. Thomas was clearly the better man vs Tim.

I believe Holmes would have re-matched Weaver if he'd fought more often and built up some intrigue and money. With injuries and court battles he only managed one fight in a year and a half when he really needed to be active. Having said that Don was dying to get one of his fighters into the WBA title and his stepson running Dokes made him first choice.

If Weaver run through Dokes maybe we would have seen a unification. Maybe Don wouldn't want it so as not to chance losing his Heavyweight claim or maybe he would have simply put future fight stipulations on Weaver in case he pulled through. What a mess the division became with 2 titles and 2 massive promotional forces as well.

 

To me Dokes was one of the lamest "champs". He won the title on an obviously too early stoppage and imo lost the rematch by 3 points. It really is too bad Weaver was robbed on the latter, as that might indeed have led to a unification. Hard to imagine things would have been much different the second time against Holmes though imo. I think Larry would have stopped Dokes as well, though that probably would have been interesting early on.

 

Ah, but Norton and the others were not the true, lineal champs. Holmes was.

 

He did fight Weaver, who fought Dokes. I would have liked to have seen Larry fight Dokes, but in reality Larry fought Witherspoon and Cooney and Weaver, and most of the top guys.

 

Because again, at the time not everyone was convinced he won the fights. It isn't hard to understand.

Norton and Thomas do not matter. Norton's legacy is always going to be that he beat Ali, and no one is sitting around debating what Thomas' legacy is the the sport at all. It becomes important when you have someone who is widely overrated for modest accomplishments.

 

Holmes didn’t need to unify. He fought awesome guys in Evangelista, Bey, Rodriguez, Frank, Ledoux, Zannon and ocasio. Just think, if he focused on Page, Thomas, Tate, etc we never would have seen those other awesome fights !!!

 

Which Holmes is not (widely overrated) and doesn’t (his accomplishments are far from modest).

What you’re saying is you are nitpicking in deconstructing his record so the things you criticize him for don’t have to apply to others.