Holmes's Title Opposition, as shit as they say???

[Jack Dempsey]

I can honestly say I've not viewed a lot of footage of Holmes's title opposition, but I seen it posted a lot on here that they were not up to much.

Which HW fighters title opposition were better or worse than the Easton Assasin's?

[AnthonyJ74]

I can honestly say I've not viewed a lot of footage of Holmes's title opposition, but I seen it posted a lot on here that they were not up to much.

Which HW fighters title opposition were better or worse than the Easton Assasin's?

A lot of the guys who turned out to be good fighters - Witherspoon, Williams, Smith - were green and inexperienced when Holmes fought them. Tim Witherspoon and Carl Williams had only, what, about 16 fights each or so. Alot of the guys he fought were bums, guys like Scott Frank and Leroy Jones. But Holmes for the most part, at least up until 1982 or so, fought the best of the division, or at least tried to. After the Cooney fight, Holmes seemed to pick his opposition much more carefully. And he outright avoided Greg Page when Page was his mandatory. I think the best fighters that Holmes fought during his reign - Tim Witherspoon, Carl Williams, Gerry Cooney - were all green and inexperienced, but at least Cooney had a fair number of fights under his belt.

[Russell]

Meh, a lot of fighters Holmes fought may have been experienced, but they were also undefeated prospects.

I'd rather fight some of those guys Holmes beat later on when for one reason or another they had huge losing streaks and other misc things keeping them back.

[mr. magoo]

I think one of your questions was " which titlists fought better or worse oppositon " Well, If Earnie Shavers was Holmes' best opponent, then Ali beats him by a long shot in terms of quality opposition. Ali defeated Shavers in 1977 at the age of 35, just 6 months before Holmes fought the same version of him. In addition, Ali's comp was infinately better when you look at his signature wins against Liston, Patterson, Norton, Frazier, and Foreman, in contrast to Holmes' best wins over an aging Norton, Witherspoon, Cooney, Berbick, Weaver and Snipes. As far as Holmes facing better comp than other champions.......Well........I've eaten some criticism for this before, therefore I won't list names of great champions, but let's just say you can do a search and draw your own conclusions. For now I'll profess, that Holmes comp was neither the best nor the worst.

[Bill1234]

I think one of your questions was " which titlists fought better or worse oppositon " Well, If Earnie Shavers was Holmes' best opponent, then Ali beats him by a long shot in terms of quality opposition. Ali defeated Shavers in 1977 at the age of 35, just 6 months before Holmes fought the same version of him. In addition, Ali's comp was infinately better when you look at his signature wins against Liston, Patterson, Norton, Frazier, and Foreman, in contrast to Holmes' best wins over an aging Norton, Witherspoon, Cooney, Berbick, Weaver and Snipes. As far as Holmes facing better comp than other champions.......Well........I've eaten some criticism for this before, therefore I won't list names of great champions, but let's just say you can do a search and draw your own conclusions. For now I'll profess, that Holmes comp was neither the best nor the worst.

Good, accurate post. But don't forget, Ali fought some older fighters too. Moore and Patterson are some.

[Dempsey1238]

Only a few champs were worse than Holmes.

Perhaps most of Jack Dempsey's. Or even Jack Johnson in regards to title defenses. I also think of thowing in Patterson and Tommy Burns over Holmes.

[Bill1234]

IMO I think people are too hard on Holmes for being a great buisness man, and nothing more. He wanted to make the most money he could with the lowest risk. You can not deny that when you stepped into the ring to take his belt, you were going to go through all hell to get it though. As one of his former sparring partners said, it was like slapping his mama.

[mr. magoo]

IMO I think people are too hard on Holmes for being a great buisness man, and nothing more. He wanted to make the most money he could with the lowest risk. You can not deny that when you stepped into the ring to take his belt, you were going to go through all hell to get it though. As one of his former sparring partners said, it was like slapping his mama.


I understand most of the reasons that prevented Holmes from meeting some of his top challengers, and frankly I think a lot of it was more politics than it was dollar signs. The problem however, is that a champion has an obligation to the fans, the sport and the deserving contenders to defend his belt against the best. In 1983, you had at least 4 good figters who could have qualified for a shot against Holmes, namely Dokes, Coetzee, Thomas and Page. Instead, he chose to fight Rodriguez, Witherspoon, Frank and M. Frazier. I'll give him some credit for fighting Witherspoon, but not the other 3, as these were horrible choices for title matches, especially with so many other qualified options. Hell, even a rematch with Weaver would have been better and more highly thought of than a fight with Lucien Rodriques, wouldn't you agree?

[Bill1234]

I understand most of the reasons that prevented Holmes from meeting some of his top challengers, and frankly I think a lot of it was more politics than it was dollar signs. The problem however, is that a champion has an obligation to the fans, the sport and the deserving contenders to defend his belt against the best. In 1983, you had at least 4 good figters who could have qualified for a shot against Holmes, namely Dokes, Coetzee, Thomas and Page. Instead, he chose to fight Rodriguez, Witherspoon, Frank and M. Frazier. I'll give him some credit for fighting Witherspoon, but not the other 3, as these were horrible choices for title matches, especially with so many other qualified options. Hell, even a rematch with Weaver would have been better and more highly thought of than a fight with Lucien Rodriques, wouldn't you agree?

Yes, but he came extremely close to fighting Coetzee. I beleive they were going to fight June 8, 1984. Or it might of been 1983. I'll check the poster at his gym tommorow. But anyway, the fight was called off about a month before fight night. I'm still trying to figure out why people bash him if they would have done it just the same even if he did fight all of them.

[Mendoza]

While Holmes had some easy title defenses, I think his over all title run was solid. Only a handful of champions had better title runs than Holmes. The thing to focus on here is the politics of the time, and the activity of Holmes as champion. Not all fights could be made.

As champion, Holmes did not cash out on washed up names to cement his legacy. Foreman, Frazier, and Lyle might have taken a pay day, but Holmes never offered them fights. Instead, Holmes fought many un-defeated fighters coming off big wins, and lots of punchers. Many of Holmes opponents were in the ring not only to get paid, but to win at all costs. Witherpoon might have had only 15 fights, but you would never know that by watching him that night. I tend to think Holmes beat the best version of Witherspoon.

[Bill1234]

While Holmes had some easy title defenses, I think his over all title run was solid. Only a handful of champions had better title runs than Holmes. The thing to focus on here is the politics of the time, and the activity of Holmes as champion. Not all fights could be made.

As champion, Holmes did not cash out on washed up names to cement his legacy. Foreman, Frazier, and Lyle might have taken a pay day, but Holmes never offered them fights. Instead, Holmes fought many un-defeated fighters coming off big wins, and lots of punchers. Many of Holmes opponents were in the ring not only to get paid, but to win at all costs. Witherpoon might have had only 15 fights, but you would never know that by watching him that night. I tend to think Holmes beat the best version of Witherspoon.


Great post. I agree with all of it.

[Dempsey1238]

Some easy?? Try a LOT.

[Duodenum]

Most of Larry's title challengers had either been champions themselves, were reigning champions, or eventual champions, whether it be for the WBC, IBF, WBA, NABF, USBA, EBU, or even at the state level (Shavers and Frank).

The only contenders Holmes defended against who never held a title at any level were Scott LeDoux (although he also challenged Greg Page for the USBA HW title), Renaldo Snipes (who was also repelled in challenges for both the USBA and NABF HW titles), Gerry Cooney (subsequently turned back by Mike Spinks in a later bid for the linear HW Title), Tex Cobb (wins over Shavers, Mercado, Leon Spinks, and two extremely close decision losses to Norton and Dokes which could have gone either way, as well as a 4 round TD loss for the vacant WBC Continental Americas Heavyweight title), and Marvis Frazier (with wins over James Broad, James Smith, James Tillis, Joe Bugner, Jose Ribalta and Philipp Brown).

Without Larry's presence to stabilize the division through the first half of the 1980's , the status of the World Heavyweight Championship would have been as incomprehensibly chaotic as it is today.

No, Holmes never defended his title against Page, Dokes, or Pinklon Thomas. But they all had an opportunity to prove themselves as a viable championship alternative to Larry in the HW title picture, and they all failed miserably. When Mike Spinks eventually was awarded a decision over Holmes, the heavyweight picture did indeed decline into chaos before Tyson cleaned up the mess. (SRL's decision over Hagler was similarly ruinous to the established hierarchy of the middleweight division. It may have been an exciting upset on the scorecards, but it was a disatrous outcome for boxing. At least the Holmes/Mike Spinks contests were for 15 rounds.)

[ChrisPontius]

His title opposition was pretty mediocre, but the fact that he kept winning for so long sort of compensates for it. Quantity over quality in this case.

I think Witherspoon, Norton and Weaver (in hindsight) were his best opponents. The thing that bothers me is that he barely got by the former two and struggled against the latter and didn't give any of them a well-deserved rematch. In other words, his title run could've been way more impressive but he chose not to take risks.

[Sweet Science]

I think the honourable and righteous Don King once quipped "I had to get most of Larry's opponents out of the morgue" or words to that effect.

[mr. magoo]

His title opposition was pretty mediocre, but the fact that he kept winning for so long sort of compensates for it. Quantity over quality in this case.

I think Witherspoon, Norton and Weaver (in hindsight) were his best opponents. The thing that bothers me is that he barely got by the former two and struggled against the latter and didn't give any of them a well-deserved rematch. In other words, his title run could've been way more impressive but he chose not to take risks.


These are all very good points and agree with most of what you're saying. Keep in mind however, that fighting Earnie Shavers twice and facing an entire generation of unbeaten prospects coming off of big wins, is not exactly a risk free career. I've never held it against him for fighting the younger challengers with not so many fights. The real problem that I had However, was his taking fights with guys who were never very good to begin with, nor ever would be such as Lucien Rodriguez, Alfredo Evangelista, Tex Cobb, Scott Ledoux, Ossie Ocasio, Lorenzo Zannon and Leon Spinks. None of those guys should have gotten title shots, and frankly I think it was ridiculous that they did. On the other hand, some of the other fighters like Cooney, Shavers, Norton, Witherspoon, Smith, Berbick, Jones, Weaver, Frank, and Williams were actually not as bad as people sometimes make them out to be in my opinion

[AnthonyJ74]

Most of Larry's title challengers had either been champions themselves, were reigning champions, or eventual champions, whether it be for the WBC, IBF, WBA, NABF, USBA, EBU, or even at the state level (Shavers and Frank).

The only contenders Holmes defended against who never held a title at any level were Scott LeDoux (although he also challenged Greg Page for the USBA HW title), Renaldo Snipes (who was also repelled in challenges for both the USBA and NABF HW titles), Gerry Cooney (subsequently turned back by Mike Spinks in a later bid for the linear HW Title), Tex Cobb (wins over Shavers, Mercado, Leon Spinks, and two extremely close decision losses to Norton and Dokes which could have gone either way, as well as a 4 round TD loss for the vacant WBC Continental Americas Heavyweight title), and Marvis Frazier (with wins over James Broad, James Smith, James Tillis, Joe Bugner, Jose Ribalta and Philipp Brown).

Without Larry's presence to stabilize the division through the first half of the 1980's , the status of the World Heavyweight Championship would have been as incomprehensibly chaotic as it is today.

No, Holmes never defended his title against Page, Dokes, or Pinklon Thomas. But they all had an opportunity to prove themselves as a viable championship alternative to Larry in the HW title picture, and they all failed miserably. When Mike Spinks eventually was awarded a decision over Holmes, the heavyweight picture did indeed decline into chaos before Tyson cleaned up the mess. (SRL's decision over Hagler was similarly ruinous to the established hierarchy of the middleweight division. It may have been an exciting upset on the scorecards, but it was a disatrous outcome for boxing. At least the Holmes/Mike Spinks contests were for 15 rounds.)

I have to disagree a little with what you said regarding Page, Thomas, e.t.c. While it's true that those guys were very inconsistent and unpredictable, they were also good fighters, especially when they were motivated and well-trained(which wasn't often, I'll admit). However, Holmes chose to fight other fighters who weren't well respected or who were not thought of highly - Frank, Jones, Rodriguez -when he just as readily could have fought Dokes, Page, Thomas, e.t.c. Greg Page was Holmes' mandatory; Holmes was obligated to fight Page and chose not to. Do you think if Marvis Frazier or Scott Frank or Lucien Rodriguez had ever been Holmes' mandatory that Larry would have avoided fighting them? Probably not. He more than likely would have fought them willingly. However, no matter what the skeptics or Holmes apologists say, Greg Page was a good fighter that had more skill than the above-mentioned fighters I just named. The same goes for Pinklon Thomas. Sure they were flawed and inconsistent, but they had natural talent that those other guys didn't. That's why Holmes found excuses not to fight them. Holmes was to get $3.1 million to fight Page; that was alot of money in 1983(Holmes got the same for Tyson in '88). But Holmes gave up his belt instead of fulfilling his mandatory. And it's strange how Holmes never gave Witherspoon a rematch after such a close fight; the same for Williams.

[mr. magoo]

While Tex Cobb, L. Rodriguez, A. Evangelista and Scott Ledoux were certainly bums, I tend to think that Leroy Jones was actually better ( at least on paper) than people give him credit for.

Jones was a large heavyweight at 6'5" and 250 Lbs, and undefeated in a respectable sum of 25 fights. In addition he held the NABF regional belt. His list of opponents were not exactly stelar, but he did manage to beat some fairly tough customers in John Denis, James Beatie and a rising Mike Weaver. Frankly, I think Jones was one of Holmes more underrated opponents. He certainly doesn't fall into the same category as many of the other contenders Holmes faced.

[Duodenum]

I have to disagree a little with what you said regarding Page, Thomas, e.t.c. While it's true that those guys were very inconsistent and unpredictable, they were also good fighters, especially when they were motivated and well-trained(which wasn't often, I'll admit). However, Holmes chose to fight other fighters who weren't well respected or who were not thought of highly - Frank, Jones, Rodriguez -when he just as readily could have fought Dokes, Page, Thomas, e.t.c. Greg Page was Holmes' mandatory; Holmes was obligated to fight Page and chose not to. Do you think if Marvis Frazier or Scott Frank or Lucien Rodriguez had ever been Holmes' mandatory that Larry would have avoided fighting them? Probably not. He more than likely would have fought them willingly. However, no matter what the skeptics or Holmes apologists say, Greg Page was a good fighter that had more skill than the above-mentioned fighters I just named. The same goes for Pinklon Thomas. Sure they were flawed and inconsistent, but they had natural talent that those other guys didn't. That's why Holmes found excuses not to fight them. Holmes was to get $3.1 million to fight Page; that was alot of money in 1983(Holmes got the same for Tyson in '88). But Holmes gave up his belt instead of fulfilling his mandatory. And it's strange how Holmes never gave Witherspoon a rematch after such a close fight; the same for Williams.Disagreement is the fuel which powers this forum and keeps it going, so I welcome yours. In the case of Carl Williams, Larry of course never would have had an opportunity to defend against him in a rematch (not that he would have anyways).

My big beef with Holmes as champion has to do with the fact that he had nearly all his title fights in Las Vegas. Although I well understand the principle of going where the money is, this didn't compare well with the globetrotting Ali's various exotic venues in Africa, Europe and Asia, or Foreman's wanderings to Jamaica, Venuzuela and Japan. To a certain extent though, he compensated for that by putting up the title against a number of EBU champions (Evangelista, Zanon, Rodgriguez), as well as Puerto Rican Ocasio and Jamaican/Canadian Berbick. So at least in that context he was still a genuine world champion. Holmes and Dokes were good friends, and didn't seem much inclined to compete against each other.

Other champions get criticized for defending the title against over-the-hill opposition, and in rematches against challengers who they had already knocked out in a previous defense. (Louis/Simon, Louis/Buddy Baer, Louis/Conn.) In 22 consecutive matches during Larry's title run, he boxed 22 different opponents. Five of them were future world champions (Ocasio, Weaver, Berbick, Witherspoon, Smith). He defended that title against two former undisputed HW champions (Ali and Leon Spinks), and relinquished it to the undisputed LHW champion. How interesting that he gets criticized for defending against ten undefeated up and coming challengers!

Most champions fail to defend against all the worthy contenders, and by my reckoning, Pinklon Thomas is the most glaring omission from his record. Even there though, Needles and Coetzee didn't exactly set the world on fire with their ten round draw. The WBC had Greg Page as their top contender despite his three dismal performances against Chaplin and Berbick. He did get his shot at the WBC title with it's pussified 12 round limit after Larry abandoned it to stick with 15 rounders, and promptly lost that shot to Holmes conquest Witherspoon.

Now that I've mention it, I'd need to look this up to be sure, but Larry may have held the record for the most different title challengers of any defending champion in history (certainly in a single division).

[Duodenum]

I tend to think that Leroy Jones was actually better ( at least on paper) than people give him credit for.

Jones was a large heavyweight at 6'5" and 250 Lbs, and undefeated in a respectable sum of 25 fights. In addition he held the NABF regional belt. His list of opponents were not exactly stelar, but he did manage to beat some fairly tough customers in John Denis, James Beatie and a rising Mike Weaver. Frankly, I think Jones was one of Holmes more underrated opponents. He certainly doesn't fall into the same category as many of the other contenders Holmes faced.The analogy I remember being applied to Jones is that he was the reincarnation of Buster Mathis. I believe he had pneumonia at the time of his title shot with Holmes, but he showed excellent upper body reflexes early. The way he held his hands up and the quickness with which he moved them gave the impression that he could effortlessly snatch flies out of thin air. He could also flick his head quickly to evade blows. Unfortunately, he had little power, his best punch being a short chopping right, and he appeared to have rather short arms for someone of his size. However, he was one of the most unique talents to ever challenge for the big enchilada.

[Titan1]

Disagreement is the fuel which powers this forum and keeps it going, so I welcome yours. In the case of Carl Williams, Larry of course never would have had an opportunity to defend against him in a rematch (not that he would have anyways).

My big beef with Holmes as champion has to do with the fact that he had nearly all his title fights in Las Vegas. Although I well understand the principle of going where the money is, this didn't compare well with the globetrotting Ali's various exotic venues in Africa, Europe and Asia, or Foreman's wanderings to Jamaica, Venuzuela and Japan. To a certain extent though, he compensated for that by putting up the title against a number of EBU champions (Evangelista, Zanon, Rodgriguez), as well as Puerto Rican Ocasio and Jamaican/Canadian Berbick. So at least in that context he was still a genuine world champion. Holmes and Dokes were good friends, and didn't seem much inclined to compete against each other.

Other champions get criticized for defending the title against over-the-hill opposition, and in rematches against challengers who they had already knocked out in a previous defense. (Louis/Simon, Louis/Buddy Baer, Louis/Conn.) In 22 consecutive matches during Larry's title run, he boxed 22 different opponents. Five of them were future world champions (Ocasio, Weaver, Berbick, Witherspoon, Smith). He defended that title against two former undisputed HW champions (Ali and Leon Spinks), and relinquished it to the undisputed LHW champion. How interesting that he gets criticized for defending against ten undefeated up and coming challengers!

Most champions fail to defend against all the worthy contenders, and by my reckoning, Pinklon Thomas is the most glaring omission from his record. Even there though, Needles and Coetzee didn't exactly set the world on fire with their ten round draw. The WBC had Greg Page as their top contender despite his three dismal performances against Chaplin and Berbick. He did get his shot at the WBC title with it's pussified 12 round limit after Larry abandoned it to stick with 15 rounders, and promptly lost that shot to Holmes conquest Witherspoon.

Now that I've mention it, I'd need to look this up to be sure, but Larry may have held the record for the most different title challengers of any defending champion in history (certainly in a single division).

Page earned his #1 ranking with his defeats of Tillis, Snipes, and Larry Frazier, and by the end of the year, was also #1 for Coetzee's belt.

[JohnThomas1]

I have to disagree a little with what you said regarding Page, Thomas, e.t.c. While it's true that those guys were very inconsistent and unpredictable, they were also good fighters, especially when they were motivated and well-trained(which wasn't often, I'll admit). However, Holmes chose to fight other fighters who weren't well respected or who were not thought of highly - Frank, Jones, Rodriguez -when he just as readily could have fought Dokes, Page, Thomas, e.t.c. Greg Page was Holmes' mandatory; Holmes was obligated to fight Page and chose not to. Do you think if Marvis Frazier or Scott Frank or Lucien Rodriguez had ever been Holmes' mandatory that Larry would have avoided fighting them? Probably not. He more than likely would have fought them willingly. However, no matter what the skeptics or Holmes apologists say, Greg Page was a good fighter that had more skill than the above-mentioned fighters I just named. The same goes for Pinklon Thomas. Sure they were flawed and inconsistent, but they had natural talent that those other guys didn't. That's why Holmes found excuses not to fight them. Holmes was to get $3.1 million to fight Page; that was alot of money in 1983(Holmes got the same for Tyson in '88). But Holmes gave up his belt instead of fulfilling his mandatory. And it's strange how Holmes never gave Witherspoon a rematch after such a close fight; the same for Williams.

A fine post built on fact rather than excuse.

[JohnThomas1]

Page earned his #1 ranking with his defeats of Tillis, Snipes, and Larry Frazier, and by the end of the year, was also #1 for Coetzee's belt.

Exactly, Page beat Snipes in an eliminator for the right to be Holmes mandatory defense, which he was due to make. Snipes he beat the well regarded Berbick and put him out of the picture. Page had beaten Tillis.

[Mendoza]

These are all very good points and agree with most of what you're saying. Keep in mind however, that fighting Earnie Shavers twice and facing an entire generation of unbeaten prospects coming off of big wins, is not exactly a risk free career. I've never held it against him for fighting the younger challengers with not so many fights. The real problem that I had However, was his taking fights with guys who were never very good to begin with, nor ever would be such as Lucien Rodriguez, Alfredo Evangelista, Tex Cobb, Scott Ledoux, Ossie Ocasio, Lorenzo Zannon and Leon Spinks. None of those guys should have gotten title shots, and frankly I think it was ridiculous that they did. On the other hand, some of the other fighters like Cooney, Shavers, Norton, Witherspoon, Smith, Berbick, Jones, Weaver, Frank, and Williams were actually not as bad as people sometimes make them out to be in my opinion

Lucien Rodriguez, Alfredo Evangelista, Tex Cobb, Scott Ledoux, Ossie Ocasio, Lorenzo Zannon and Leon Spinks were not top competition for sure, but there were reasons why they got title shots.

L. Spinks, Zannon, And Evangelista were dance partners of Ali. L. Spinks beat Ali. Evangelista gave a declining Ali some problems. Holmes used the exposure of these men and gave them title shots to prove he was a worthy successor of Ali. The older Ali took the above fighters the distance. Holmes knocked the entire lot out. Spinks as a former lineal title holder was not a bad defense in my book. Anyone who calls themselves a fan of boxing is glad Holmes thrashed Leon Spinks.

Cobb was the undefeated “ white hope “ before Cooney. Ocasio was a very skilled cruiser weight sized fighter in the heavyweight division. LeDoux was a popular journeyman fighter who mixed with his era.

The above names don’t offer the foundation for legacy, and none of the above fighters gave Holmes a real challenge. This is not to say that the fights themselves were not memorable. Cobb took everything Holmes threw at him for 15 rounds of boxing! Spinks was blown out in spectular fashion.

[Dempsey1238]

Spinks ONLY became champ, because he was at the right place at the right time. If Ali could not get by a 7-0 novice. Than Ali was RELLY over the hill. Holmes could have beating Spinks in 78 no problems.

[mr. magoo]

Cobb was the undefeated “ white hope “ before Cooney. Ocasio was a very skilled cruiser weight sized fighter in the heavyweight division. LeDoux was a popular journeyman fighter who mixed with his era.


You pointed out some nice facts, except Cobb was not the undefeated white hope when he fought Holmes. He had previously lost to an aging Norton just shortly before Ken got Killed by Cooney. Cobb was also defeated by Michael Dokes. I'll give Cobb credit for being a genuinely tough guy, but I still didn't see the merit in giving him a shot. Besides he did little else than take a pounding that evening. Spinks had the Ali win in his pocket, but had lost on a single round to Coetzee, as well as tying with Ledoux and I believe Lopez. With only 10 victories to his credit and some bad losses, he was by no means a legitimate contender. Scott Ledoux was a bum, and I don't think we even have to go into the reasons here.

By the way, why are we typing in black????

[mr. magoo]

Exactly, Page beat Snipes in an eliminator for the right to be Holmes mandatory defense, which he was due to make. Snipes he beat the well regarded Berbick and put him out of the picture. Page had beaten Tillis.

Yes John,

We all know what a great world beater good ol' Greg was. :D

Outside of his losses to Berbick, Witherspoon, Tubbs, Bugner, Bey, Wills and oh.......Just about everybody.......He was surely an all time great. :D

[Bummy Davis]

While Tex Cobb, L. Rodriguez, A. Evangelista and Scott Ledoux were certainly bums, I tend to think that Leroy Jones was actually better ( at least on paper) than people give him credit for.

Jones was a large heavyweight at 6'5" and 250 Lbs, and undefeated in a respectable sum of 25 fights. In addition he held the NABF regional belt. His list of opponents were not exactly stelar, but he did manage to beat some fairly tough customers in John Denis, James Beatie and a rising Mike Weaver. Frankly, I think Jones was one of Holmes more underrated opponents. He certainly doesn't fall into the same category as many of the other contenders Holmes faced.


I watched Leroy Jones fight in the amatuers and Pro's, he was a fat, slow boxer, who was not much of a puncher, I remember Tom Bethea(a middleweight) beating him up in the 28th st. gym in N.Y. city (Howie Albert and Gil Clancey's gym) Evangelista and Rodriguez were bums,Ledoux was a tough jouneyman but really limited his best fight was a draw vs Norton), Ossie Ocasio had 13 fights, Frazier 10, Leon Spinx 10-2-2 (KO'din 1 by Coetzee in a few fight before that) David Bey was 14-0 but lost 6 of his next 7 fights after Holmes and went 5-3-1 in his last 9 fights. Weaver was 19-8 . going into the Holmes fight and that fight gave him confidence. Weaver should have gotten a rematch,especially after he won a title.Witherspoon was 16-0 and Williams was 15-0 and a lot of people felt they beat Larry but Larry never rematched them. Thomas had a moment,Dokes, Page, Coetzee proberly the best fighters other than Holmes and Big John Tate looked ok for a bit but that fight never materialized after Tate was strectched by Weaver and went downhill from there. I liked Larry as a fighter right after the Norton fight but was waiting for a unification or for him to fight the best of his era which he did not. Cooney fought 5 rounds vs Jimmy Young on 5/25/80 but fought only 2 times both 1st round ko's until he fought Larry for the title 6/11/82, so he fought 2 rounds in 2 years.(and it was NO secret that Conney had a bad COKE problem) His fight against Scott was stopped by a Thumb in the eye and the James Smith fight was going tough for Larry until he got that thumb in Bonecrushers eye(Smith dogged it) Still Larry did have a nice run (very protected) and WE can not forget that King was caught Paying off John Ort of the ring Magazine to obtain a ranking. I am a boxing fan but old school, I was fustrated at the time even though I liked Larry chances vs the guys he did not fight. My doubts were that Larry got rocked by Snipes(a so so puncher) and dropped and Dropped hard from 1 punch(no Shame) by Shavers, aS A FAN I WAS ROBBED OF THE EXCITEMENT OF WATCHING HOLMES fight a very good right hand puncher like Coetzee, Dokes ,Page, Thomas, Weaver (rematch) or Tate, and rematches with fighters that deserved them. I Hate to look like I Hate and I dont but I have to say it like I saw it then

[Sonny's jab]

If Wladimir Klitschko announced his next fight against an opponent the equivalent of Lorenzo Zanon, Scott LeDoux or Lucien Rodriguez there'd be a TON OF CRITICISM falling on Wlad.

Actually, some of Holmes' challengers you would scoff at their chances of giving a 2007 Holyfield any sort of fight. Holmes probably fought one or two you wouldn't count on to get past Vinny Maddalone, in all honesty.

I dont doubt Holmes's greatness, but it's true that a lot of his title opposition was absolute shit.

[mr. magoo]

If Wladimir Klitschko announced his next fight against an opponent the equivalent of Lorenzo Zanon, Scott LeDoux or Lucien Rodriguez there'd be a TON OF CRITICISM falling on Wlad.

Actually, some of Holmes' challengers you would scoff at their chances of giving a 2007 Holyfield any sort of fight. Holmes probably fought one or two you wouldn't count on to get past Vinny Maddalone, in all honesty.

I dont doubt Holmes's greatness, but it's true that a lot of his title opposition was absolute shit.

Sadly, I have to agree.

Although I will always view Holmes as a great champion, a lot of the guys he fought were so bad that some of them might even fall into the category of tomato can. Scott Ledoux was a textbook example of the type challenger that I'm talking about. I mean, who in the hell did that guy ever beat to warrant fighting for the greatest title on earth? Christ, I think I'd have to rate Chuck Wepner higher than Ledoux. Leon Spinks was another one. He got his ass handed to him in one round by Coetzee, plus he drew with Scott Ledoux, and of course he gets a title shot. Tex Cobb gets beat by Dokes and an aging Norton, plus his last fight before facing Holmes was against Jeff Shelburg, and low and behold, he gets a title shot. Lucien Rodriguez, Alfredo Evangelista and Lorenzo Zanon couldn't knockout a guy even if they hit him with a club, unless of course if they were beating on each other, which they did on numerous occasions. Holmes may as well have been fighting the three stooges. Ossie Ocasio was barely a heavyweight with a cruiser build and only had 13 fights. His only claim to fame at that point was a couple of very close decsions over a washed up young.

The rest of Holmes opponents, I don't think so badly of, as some often do. Although, Witherspoon, Smith, Williams, M. Frazier, Berbick, Snipes and Cooney were on the inexperienced side without too many fights, I still say they were fairly qualified challengers who had good records and were coming off big wins. Additionally, Scott Frank and Leroy Jones were probably not as bad as people give them credit for, although I'll agree that Page, Thomas and Dokes should have gotten a crack at Holmes before some of these guys did.

[Mendoza]

If Wladimir Klitschko announced his next fight against an opponent the equivalent of Lorenzo Zanon, Scott LeDoux or Lucien Rodriguez there'd be a TON OF CRITICISM falling on Wlad.

Actually, some of Holmes' challengers you would scoff at their chances of giving a 2007 Holyfield any sort of fight. Holmes probably fought one or two you wouldn't count on to get past Vinny Maddalone, in all honesty.

I dont doubt Holmes's greatness, but it's true that a lot of his title opposition was absolute shit.

I think we all agree that Holmes had some easy title defenses. Any long tenured champion does, and that includes Joe Louis. The modern day example would be Hopkins. Many of the names on his consecutive title defense ledger are relative unknowns too.

What history should focus on is not Holmes version of the bum of the month club, but his wins over quality heavyweights in Norton, Witherpsoon, Smith, Shavers, Weaver, and Cooney. Those were good title defenses. Most champions fail to have 6 title defenses in a row. Holmes managed to come within one fight of tying Rocky Marciano’s un-defeated record. Advanced age had a lot to do with his first loss. Holmes can hang his hat here.

[Mendoza]

I have to disagree a little with what you said regarding Page, Thomas, e.t.c. While it's true that those guys were very inconsistent and unpredictable, they were also good fighters, especially when they were motivated and well-trained(which wasn't often, I'll admit). However, Holmes chose to fight other fighters who weren't well respected or who were not thought of highly - Frank, Jones, Rodriguez -when he just as readily could have fought Dokes, Page, Thomas, e.t.c. Greg Page was Holmes' mandatory; Holmes was obligated to fight Page and chose not to. Do you think if Marvis Frazier or Scott Frank or Lucien Rodriguez had ever been Holmes' mandatory that Larry would have avoided fighting them? Probably not. He more than likely would have fought them willingly. However, no matter what the skeptics or Holmes apologists say, Greg Page was a good fighter that had more skill than the above-mentioned fighters I just named. The same goes for Pinklon Thomas. Sure they were flawed and inconsistent, but they had natural talent that those other guys didn't. That's why Holmes found excuses not to fight them. Holmes was to get $3.1 million to fight Page; that was alot of money in 1983(Holmes got the same for Tyson in '88). But Holmes gave up his belt instead of fulfilling his mandatory. And it's strange how Holmes never gave Witherspoon a rematch after such a close fight; the same for Williams.

Greg Page was a disappointment. His career highlight was beating Coetzee, but aside from that he lost his other high stakes matches to the likes of Witherpsoon, Bey, and Berbick, which concidentely were fighters Holmes had already beaten. If Page defeated Bey in 1984, perhaps Holmes gives Page the title shot next. But of course Bey won the fight, and got a chance at Holmes title next. As an then undefeated fighter, Bey picked up some momentum from the Page hype, then was badly outclassed and knocked out by Holmes in his next fight.

Don King felt the hype attached to Page’s name. Page could punch. He also had some geographical comparisons to Ali. Holmes main flaw as champion was not skill. It was popularity. Don King saw a great opportunity to make money. The hype attached to Page’s name combined with the fans who just wanted to see Holmes lose would have put rear ends in the seats. This is a big reason why Page had a chance to fight Holmes. Holmes big mistake was not picking Page to tie Maricano’s record. Page was often out of shape, and unmotivated. At his best Page could tease you with ability, but Page’s best nights were far and few between.

Thomas was a fine fighter, but he came along at the tail end of Holmes career. Perhaps Holmes could have fought Thomas instead of Carl Williams, but the two were near even with each other when Willaims got the title shot. I don’t think Holmes had enough time to officially avoid Thomas, which leads me to my next question! Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next had he defeated Spinks to break Marciano’s record? It could have been Thomas.

[mr. magoo]

I think we all agree that Holmes had some easy title defenses. Any long tenured champion does, and that includes Joe Louis. The modern day example would be Hopkins. Many of the names on his consecutive title defense ledger are relative unknowns too.

What history should focus on is not Holmes version of the bum of the month club, but his wins over quality heavyweights in Norton, Witherpsoon, Smith, Shavers, Weaver, and Cooney. Those were good title defenses. Most champions fail to have 6 title defenses in a row. Holmes managed to come within one fight of tying Rocky Marciano’s un-defeated record. Advanced age had a lot to do with his first loss. Holmes can hang his hat here.

All good points,

Not every opponent that Joe Louis fought was of the quality of a Schmeling, Wlacott or Baer. Not all of Rocky's fights were against a Walcott, Moore or lastarza. Not everyone Tyson beat was a Spinks, Tucker or Thomas. The same could even be said for Muhammad Ali who arguably fought the best comp of all of them.

When taken into the right context, Holmes' reign as champion wasn't much different from that of most champions. In fact, I'd say he was better than most. What's more, while Holmes certainly fought a lot of undeserving challengers, he also probably fought more young undefeated contenders on the rise, than just about any other champion including Muhammad Ali. In addition, even some of the guys who had some losses were still very competitive and even left some impressive legacies behind. Norton, Shavers, Weaver, Witherspoon, Berbick, Cooney and Mercer ( later ) were all fine fighters, many of whom left boxing with noteable career accomplishments. Even some of the other guys like Jones, Frank and Snipes were not as bad as we sometimes like to think.

[AnthonyJ74]

Greg Page was a disappointment. His career highlight was beating Coetzee, but aside from that he lost his other high stakes matches to the likes of Witherpsoon, Bey, and Berbick, which concidentely were fighters Holmes had already beaten. If Page defeated Bey in 1984, perhaps Holmes gives Page the title shot next. But of course Bey won the fight, and got a chance at Holmes title next. As an then undefeated fighter, Bey picked up some momentum from the Page hype, then was badly outclassed and knocked out by Holmes in his next fight.

Don King felt the hype attached to Page’s name. Page could punch. He also had some geographical comparisons to Ali. Holmes main flaw as champion was not skill. It was popularity. Don King saw a great opportunity to make money. The hype attached to Page’s name combined with the fans who just wanted to see Holmes lose would have put rear ends in the seats. This is a big reason why Page had a chance to fight Holmes. Holmes big mistake was not picking Page to tie Maricano’s record. Page was often out of shape, and unmotivated. At his best Page could tease you with ability, but Page’s best nights were far and few between.

Thomas was a fine fighter, but he came along at the tail end of Holmes career. Perhaps Holmes could have fought Thomas instead of Carl Williams, but the two were near even with each other when Willaims got the title shot. I don’t think Holmes had enough time to officially avoid Thomas, which leads me to my next question! Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next had he defeated Spinks to break Marciano’s record? It could have been Thomas.

So, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier, Lucien Rodriguez, and Scott Frank were not disappointments? Only Greg Page was? And, what you fail to address is, Greg Page won the elimination fight for the right to fight Holmes. But Page didn't get his shot at Holmes. Why not? You said that David Bey won the fight against Greg Page and was rewarded a shot at Holmes. Why didn't Holmes be so generous when it was Greg Page doing the winning? Especially when it was an eliminator expressly for the purpose of selecting Holmes' next challenger.
Fighting guys who are not well regarded or highly ranked when you are a champion is bad enough. But it's worse when you continue to fight those guys while you have a good, skillful heavyweight waiting in the wings who is your mandatory!

[mr. magoo]

So, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier, Lucien Rodriguez, and Scott Frank were not disappointments? Only Greg Page was? And, what you fail to address is, Greg Page won the elimination fight for the right to fight Holmes. But Page didn't get his shot at Holmes. Why not? You said that David Bey won the fight against Greg Page and was rewarded a shot at Holmes. Why didn't Holmes be so generous when it was Greg Page doing the winning? Especially when it was an eliminator expressly for the purpose of selecting Holmes' next challenger.
Fighting guys who are not well regarded or highly ranked when you are a champion is bad enough. But it's worse when you continue to fight those guys while you have a good, skillful heavyweight waiting in the wings who is your mandatory!


There were reasons why the Greg Page fight never materialized.
In 1983, Larry Holmes and Don King parted ways, and Holmes became an independant champion who promoted his own fights. King was a close associate of the president of the WBC, and was also in control of Greg Page's career as well. Holmes and King had a very bad falling out, and Larry didn't want to do any sort of Business with him anymore, especially if it meant getting raped of his purse. You see, what a lot of people don't realize, is that even though the Page fight would have made him some 3.1 million, he wouldn't have walked away with a lot of it. At the end of the day, KIng would sometimes end up with as much as 55% of a fighter's purse. Holmes shuttered at such a thought and began putting together his own fights. In late 1983, he was approached by the newly formed IBF organization and told that they would really like for him to bear their title. Holmes began calling fighters like Scott Frank over the telephone personally himself . He called Joe Frazier and spoke to him extensively about setting up a match with his son Marvis, which ended up being a nontitle fight in the interval between dropping the WBC and acquiring the IBF.

My point of the matter is this, history is not built on fact. It's merely based on fact. People often choose to believe what they want in an effort to create their own understanding of history. While I agree that Holmes probably should have fought certain challengers as opposed to some of the men he actually did face, I also believe that their were more explanations to his not fighting them than a mere case of cold feet or greed for that matter. In the real world business deals are made and broken constantly depending on the ability of two or more entities to see eye to eye. Seeing as how 1983 is long over with, and we'll never know all the facts of the so called history, I prefer to take Holmes career into a context that foucuses on the good things that he did rather than nit picking about him never facing a handful of fighters who at best had 3 good wins a piece, drug problems and were often washed up by the time they were in their late 20's.

[Cojimar 1945]

The main issue regarding Holmes challengers is that he failed to face many of the most deserving contenders and some of his challengers were less deserving than guys he failed to face.

[ChrisPontius]

I watched Leroy Jones fight in the amatuers and Pro's, he was a fat, slow boxer, who was not much of a puncher, I remember Tom Bethea(a middleweight) beating him up in the 28th st. gym in N.Y. city (Howie Albert and Gil Clancey's gym) Evangelista and Rodriguez were bums,Ledoux was a tough jouneyman but really limited his best fight was a draw vs Norton), Ossie Ocasio had 13 fights, Frazier 10, Leon Spinx 10-2-2 (KO'din 1 by Coetzee in a few fight before that) David Bey was 14-0 but lost 6 of his next 7 fights after Holmes and went 5-3-1 in his last 9 fights. Weaver was 19-8 . going into the Holmes fight and that fight gave him confidence. Weaver should have gotten a rematch,especially after he won a title.Witherspoon was 16-0 and Williams was 15-0 and a lot of people felt they beat Larry but Larry never rematched them. Thomas had a moment,Dokes, Page, Coetzee proberly the best fighters other than Holmes and Big John Tate looked ok for a bit but that fight never materialized after Tate was strectched by Weaver and went downhill from there. I liked Larry as a fighter right after the Norton fight but was waiting for a unification or for him to fight the best of his era which he did not. Cooney fought 5 rounds vs Jimmy Young on 5/25/80 but fought only 2 times both 1st round ko's until he fought Larry for the title 6/11/82, so he fought 2 rounds in 2 years.(and it was NO secret that Conney had a bad COKE problem) His fight against Scott was stopped by a Thumb in the eye and the James Smith fight was going tough for Larry until he got that thumb in Bonecrushers eye(Smith dogged it) Still Larry did have a nice run (very protected) and WE can not forget that King was caught Paying off John Ort of the ring Magazine to obtain a ranking. I am a boxing fan but old school, I was fustrated at the time even though I liked Larry chances vs the guys he did not fight. My doubts were that Larry got rocked by Snipes(a so so puncher) and dropped and Dropped hard from 1 punch(no Shame) by Shavers, aS A FAN I WAS ROBBED OF THE EXCITEMENT OF WATCHING HOLMES fight a very good right hand puncher like Coetzee, Dokes ,Page, Thomas, Weaver (rematch) or Tate, and rematches with fighters that deserved them. I Hate to look like I Hate and I dont but I have to say it like I saw it then

Good post Bummy :good

[JohnThomas1]

Yes John,

We all know what a great world beater good ol' Greg was. :D

Outside of his losses to Berbick, Witherspoon, Tubbs, Bugner, Bey, Wills and oh.......Just about everybody.......He was surely an all time great. :D

Is this like Holyfield's two very close fights with Lewis?

:D

[Duodenum]

There were reasons why the Greg Page fight never materialized.
In 1983, Larry Holmes and Don King parted ways, and Holmes became an independant champion who promoted his own fights. King was a close associate of the president of the WBC, and was also in control of Greg Page's career as well. Holmes and King had a very bad falling out, and Larry didn't want to do any sort of Business with him anymore, especially if it meant getting raped of his purse. You see, what a lot of people don't realize, is that even though the Page fight would have made him some 3.1 million, he wouldn't have walked away with a lot of it. At the end of the day, KIng would sometimes end up with as much as 55% of a fighter's purse. Holmes shuttered at such a thought and began putting together his own fights. In late 1983, he was approached by the newly formed IBF organization and told that they would really like for him to bear their title. Holmes began calling fighters like Scott Frank over the telephone personally himself . He called Joe Frazier and spoke to him extensively about setting up a match with his son Marvis, which ended up being a nontitle fight in the interval between dropping the WBC and acquiring the IBF.

My point of the matter is this, history is not built on fact. It's merely based on fact. People often choose to believe what they want in an effort to create their own understanding of history. While I agree that Holmes probably should have fought certain challengers as opposed to some of the men he actually did face, I also believe that their were more explanations to his not fighting them than a mere case of cold feet or greed for that matter. In the real world business deals are made and broken constantly depending on the ability of two or more entities to see eye to eye. Seeing as how 1983 is long over with, and we'll never know all the facts of the so called history, I prefer to take Holmes career into a context that foucuses on the good things that he did rather than nit picking about him never facing a handful of fighters who at best had 3 good wins a piece, drug problems and were often washed up by the time they were in their late 20's.Articulate and well-measured post.

Essentially, the WBC and WBA were fronts for King and Arum, certainly in the States, and ratings could be a sham. Larry is hardly destitute today, thanks in no small part to slipping out from underneath Don King's feet. Only Holmes and Hagler (who remained with Arum and Top Rank) had the stature to secure both their independence and continued general recognition as the one true champion in their prestigious divisions. Only the greatest of the great champions can ever pull this off. While there were many ATG performers through the early 1980's, Hagler and Holmes were the only great champions of historic marquee weight classifications, Hagler officially, and Holmes de facto and ex officio.

[mr. magoo]

Is this like Holyfield's two very close fights with Lewis?

:D

I saw both fights, and I tend to think they were very close indeed. In fact, I thought very highly of Holyfield's efforts, given how faded his skills were, and how so many others failed in much worse fashion against Lewis. One thing is for certain though, If super duper Greg were in there that evening, he would have taken both Lewis and Holyfield at the same time. :good

[JohnThomas1]

I saw both fights, and I tend to think they were very close indeed. In fact, I thought very highly of Holyfield's efforts, given how faded his skills were, and how so many others failed in much worse fashion against Lewis. One thing is for certain though, If super duper Greg were in there that evening, he would have taken both Lewis and Holyfield at the same time. :good

Hahaha, love ya train of thought :D

I thought Lewis won easy first fight, closer tho inarguable in the second. The silly draw in the first made Lewis had to play more into Holy's hands in the rematch.

[mr. magoo]

Hahaha, love ya train of thought :D

I thought Lewis won easy first fight, closer tho inarguable in the second. The silly draw in the first made Lewis had to play more into Holy's hands in the rematch.

Most people ( and not just yourself in fairness) seem to be disagreeing with me that Holyfield put up a great effort in those fights. Perhaps I'm a bit biased towards Evander. I will say though, he showed more heart than even most of Lewis's prime opponents. The second fight was truly a good one. Holyfield punched more to the chest and body, which some say he should have done more of in the first fight. ;)

[JohnThomas1]

Most people ( and not just yourself in fairness) seem to be disagreeing with me that Holyfield put up a great effort in those fights. Perhaps I'm a bit biased towards Evander. I will say though, he showed more heart than even most of Lewis's prime opponents. The second fight was truly a good one. Holyfield punched more to the chest and body, which some say he should have done more of in the first fight. ;)

Lewis was there trading a bit more too, so Holy could get more of these shots off. Holyfield did well yes, Lewis is pretty scary really. I remember one uppercut Holy shook off, jesus damn c!

[Sonny's jab]

Most people ( and not just yourself in fairness) seem to be disagreeing with me that Holyfield put up a great effort in those fights. Perhaps I'm a bit biased towards Evander. I will say though, he showed more heart than even most of Lewis's prime opponents. The second fight was truly a good one. Holyfield punched more to the chest and body, which some say he should have done more of in the first fight. ;)

Holyfield didn't do too badly.
Lewis was robbed badly in that first fight but he didn't completely outclass Holyfield by any means. It was one-sided but not embarrassingly so, like Lewis-Tua for example.
Holyfield actually looked in the fight in every round, but he just got outboxed in most of them. It wasn't as if Lewis appeared to be doing as he pleased, he had to box out of his skin to merely peck out a clear points win. Holyfield seemed to fight with a low estimation of Lewis, and had no plan B when he failed to KO Lewis in the 3rd.
I'd give Lewis 9 or 10 rounds but the rounds themselves were not overly one-sided. Lewis had a "clear edge" rather than severe dominant superiority.

The second fight was very close.

I agree with you that Holyfield's real prime was behind him but I dont think he was too far off his best against Lewis. Styles make fights, and Holyfield would never be a sure thing over Lewis. Holyfield looks best against aggressive fighters. Lewis was a smart fighter, showed a lot of strategic intelligence, and he'd always be too smart to fight all-out to Holyfield's counter-punching strengths. Lewis waits for Holyfield to come at him, hangs back and pecks away with his reach forcing Holyfield to initiate all attacks. Holyfield is always more comfortable setting a fast-pace on counter-attacks.

[mr. magoo]

Holyfield didn't do too badly.
Lewis was robbed badly in that first fight but he didn't completely outclass Holyfield by any means. It was one-sided but not embarrassingly so, like Lewis-Tua for example.
Holyfield actually looked in the fight in every round, but he just got outboxed in most of them. It wasn't as if Lewis appeared to be doing as he pleased, he had to box out of his skin to merely peck out a clear points win. Holyfield seemed to fight with a low estimation of Lewis, and had no plan B when he failed to KO Lewis in the 3rd.
I'd give Lewis 9 or 10 rounds but the rounds themselves were not overly one-sided. Lewis had a "clear edge" rather than severe dominant superiority.

The second fight was very close
I agree with you that Holyfield's real prime was behind him but I dont think he was too far off his best against Lewis. Styles make fights, and Holyfield would never be a sure thing over Lewis. Holyfield looks best against aggressive fighters. Lewis was a smart fighter, showed a lot of strategic intelligence, and he'd always be too smart to fight all-out to Holyfield's counter-punching strengths. Lewis waits for Holyfield to come at him, hangs back and pecks away with his reach forcing Holyfield to initiate all attacks. Holyfield is always more comfortable setting a fast-pace on counter-attacks.

Good Post, and a reasonable analysis of Holyfield and Lewis's styles. You're absolutely right. Evander did his best work when men took the fight to him as opposed to Holyfield having to be in persuit. In many of his early heavyweight fights such as Dokes, Stewart, Rodriguez, Douglas and Bowe, the opposition came to him.

[AnthonyJ74]

The main issue regarding Holmes challengers is that he failed to face many of the most deserving contenders and some of his challengers were less deserving than guys he failed to face.

Exactly! To an unbiased observer that should be plain to see.

[mr. magoo]

Exactly! To an unbiased observer that should be plain to see.

It's not biased to take a middle of the road approach and acknowledge the pluses as well as the minuses. To lean soley in the direction that his reign was weak and that all of his opponents were underacheivers, is biased in and of itself.

[AnthonyJ74]

It's not biased to take a middle of the road approach and acknowledge the pluses as well as the minuses. To lean soley in the direction that his reign was weak and that all of his opponents were underacheivers, is biased in and of itself.

I agree. I'm not stating that Holmes' reign was weak overall and that all of his opponents were garbage, I'm just stating that Holmes did not always take on and/or seek out the best possible opponents. I think Holmes was a great fighter, but with most fighters, he had his share of negatives, at least in terms of his opponents. IF Holmes had retired after the Cooney fight, I doubt there would be much anybody could say in regards to Holmes' quality of opposition. It was the last 2-3 years of his reign where it seemed like he was coasting and trying to avoid the more stern challenges.

[Mendoza]

So, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier, Lucien Rodriguez, and Scott Frank were not disappointments? Only Greg Page was? And, what you fail to address is, Greg Page won the elimination fight for the right to fight Holmes. But Page didn't get his shot at Holmes. Why not? You said that David Bey won the fight against Greg Page and was rewarded a shot at Holmes. Why didn't Holmes be so generous when it was Greg Page doing the winning? Especially when it was an eliminator expressly for the purpose of selecting Holmes' next challenger.
Fighting guys who are not well regarded or highly ranked when you are a champion is bad enough. But it's worse when you continue to fight those guys while you have a good, skillful heavyweight waiting in the wings who is your mandatory!

History tells us Greg Page was never a great fighter. In fact I would argue that Norton, Shavers, Berbick, Witherpsoon, and Spinks were better fighters than Page. Holmes fought all of five of them in title shots. At best Page could have been Holmes 6th best opponent, though fans of Cooney, Bonecrucher Smith, and Weaver might argue for the 6th spot.

In my view Page ranks anywhere from 6-10th best of the opponents that Holmes fought in his title defenses up to the second Spinks fight. Champions hardly get any fuss for not fighting the #6, #7, or #8 man when they were champion. Was Page a hot commodity at one time? Sure. Did Page do enough to earn a shot for a lineal championship? I don’t think so. As I mentioned before, Page was rather poor in his high stakes fights. Had Page won a few he lost, or beaten Bey, perhaps Holmes would have given him a shot. It’s not like Page was giving Holmes a Cooney like pay day. Page and Don King offered Holmes a bit more than his normal title defense. This is true. I am not familiar with the particulars of the contract. I know how Don King operates. Surely the contract to fight Page was not in Holmes best interest. So Holmes avoided Page for one fight, than Page proved to be hype. It’s a minor blip. Most popular champions don’t get this type of backlash, but then again I get the feeling Holmes is not too popular here. Lewis gave up belts to Ruiz, and Byrd. Does this diminish Lewis career. Not in my opinion. However those who don’t care for Lewis might see this as ducking.

[Titan1]

History tells us Greg Page was never a great fighter. In fact I would argue that Norton, Shavers, Berbick, Witherpsoon, and Spinks were better fighters than Page. Holmes fought all of five of them in title shots. At best Page could have been Holmes 6th best opponent, though fans of Cooney, Bonecrucher Smith, and Weaver might argue for the 6th spot.

In my view Page ranks anywhere from 6-10th best of the opponents that Holmes fought in his title defenses up to the second Spinks fight. Champions hardly get any fuss for not fighting the #6, #7, or #8 man when they were champion. Was Page a hot commodity at one time? Sure. Did Page do enough to earn a shot for a lineal championship? I don’t think so. As I mentioned before, Page was rather poor in his high stakes fights. Had Page won a few he lost, or beaten Bey, perhaps Holmes would have given him a shot. It’s not like Page was giving Holmes a Cooney like pay day. Page and Don King offered Holmes a bit more than his normal title defense. This is true. I am not familiar with the particulars of the contract. I know how Don King operates. Surely the contract to fight Page was not in Holmes best interest. So Holmes avoided Page for one fight, than Page proved to be hype. It’s a minor blip. Most popular champions don’t get this type of backlash, but then again I get the feeling Holmes is not too popular here. Lewis gave up belts to Ruiz, and Byrd. Does this diminish Lewis career. Not in my opinion. However those who don’t care for Lewis might see this as ducking.

How about Larry ducked Greg when he really should've fought him.

[Bill1234]

History tells us Greg Page was never a great fighter. In fact I would argue that Norton, Shavers, Berbick, Witherpsoon, and Spinks were better fighters than Page. Holmes fought all of five of them in title shots. At best Page could have been Holmes 6th best opponent, though fans of Cooney, Bonecrucher Smith, and Weaver might argue for the 6th spot.

In my view Page ranks anywhere from 6-10th best of the opponents that Holmes fought in his title defenses up to the second Spinks fight. Champions hardly get any fuss for not fighting the #6, #7, or #8 man when they were champion. Was Page a hot commodity at one time? Sure. Did Page do enough to earn a shot for a lineal championship? I don’t think so. As I mentioned before, Page was rather poor in his high stakes fights. Had Page won a few he lost, or beaten Bey, perhaps Holmes would have given him a shot. It’s not like Page was giving Holmes a Cooney like pay day. Page and Don King offered Holmes a bit more than his normal title defense. This is true. I am not familiar with the particulars of the contract. I know how Don King operates. Surely the contract to fight Page was not in Holmes best interest. So Holmes avoided Page for one fight, than Page proved to be hype. It’s a minor blip. Most popular champions don’t get this type of backlash, but then again I get the feeling Holmes is not too popular here. Lewis gave up belts to Ruiz, and Byrd. Does this diminish Lewis career. Not in my opinion. However those who don’t care for Lewis might see this as ducking.

Great post.:good

[Bill1234]

How about Larry ducked Greg when he really should've fought him.

You mean Larry finding out that Page was his mandatory only 1 week before he fought Marvis Frazier. IMO Larry did the smart thing and fought Frazier. He trained for a low risk fight, not one with a top of the line fighter.

[AnthonyJ74]

How about Larry ducked Greg when he really should've fought him.

Short, sweet, and to the point!

[JohnThomas1]

You mean Larry finding out that Page was his mandatory only 1 week before he fought Marvis Frazier. IMO Larry did the smart thing and fought Frazier. He trained for a low risk fight, not one with a top of the line fighter.

Come on Bill, lets be sane about this. Page - Snipes on the undercard of Holmes - Witherspoon was billed as the eliminator for Holmes mandatory defense. In other words he new as soon as Page - Snipes was publicised if not earlier. Plain irrefutable fact. Even then he refused and the WBC let him fight Frank on the premise that he then fight Page. Finally when he made for Frazier they threatened to take the title off him, and then did.

[My dinner with Conteh]

You mean Larry finding out that Page was his mandatory only 1 week before he fought Marvis Frazier.


Let's all laugh at the simpleton. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[JohnThomas1]

Let's all laugh at the simpleton. :lol: :lol: :lol:

How many times does it take

:patsch

[My dinner with Conteh]

How many times does it take

:patsch


I know. If Larry's The Mallard, Bill is definitely The Goldfish. He seems to have a memory like one. :yep

[Bummy Davis]

The only thing I would say is look at the other Champs say, Joe Louis,Rocky Marciano,Ali,Even Braddock or Patterson had not fought there top contenders lets say Thomas,Dokes,Page,Coetzee,Tate,Weaver, lets say Louis never unified and HAD OTHERS WHO CALLED THEM SELVES CHAMP, lets say he never rematched Walcott,Godoy,Buddy Baer,Conn. Lets say he had close,disputed decisions that he never rematched, Lets say that he avoided the most dangerous guys for his style, top 5 of the division, Lets say it was Marciano,Lewis,Ali, lets say Braddock avoided Louis and had 5 defences vs 10-0,10-2-2,13-0,14 fight fighters for defences, or lets say Patterson never fought Liston, Ingo. How would you feel about them. A lot of people have blinders on when it comes to Holmes and refuse to see what happened during his rein

[JohnThomas1]

I know. If Larry's The Mallard, Bill is definitely The Goldfish. He seems to have a memory like one. :yep

:lol:

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by Mendoza
History tells us Greg Page was never a great fighter. In fact I would argue that Norton, Shavers, Berbick, Witherpsoon, and Spinks were better fighters than Page. Holmes fought all of five of them in title shots. At best Page could have been Holmes 6th best opponent, though fans of Cooney, Bonecrucher Smith, and Weaver might argue for the 6th spot.

In my view Page ranks anywhere from 6-10th best of the opponents that Holmes fought in his title defenses up to the second Spinks fight. Champions hardly get any fuss for not fighting the #6, #7, or #8 man when they were champion. Was Page a hot commodity at one time? Sure. Did Page do enough to earn a shot for a lineal championship? I don’t think so. As I mentioned before, Page was rather poor in his high stakes fights. Had Page won a few he lost, or beaten Bey, perhaps Holmes would have given him a shot. It’s not like Page was giving Holmes a Cooney like pay day. Page and Don King offered Holmes a bit more than his normal title defense. This is true. I am not familiar with the particulars of the contract. I know how Don King operates. Surely the contract to fight Page was not in Holmes best interest. So Holmes avoided Page for one fight, than Page proved to be hype. It’s a minor blip. Most popular champions don’t get this type of backlash, but then again I get the feeling Holmes is not too popular here. Lewis gave up belts to Ruiz, and Byrd. Does this diminish Lewis career. Not in my opinion. However those who don’t care for Lewis might see this as ducking.


How about Larry ducked Greg when he really should've fought him.

Are you aware of how many deals and contract offers actually happen before a fight contract is made? Are you aware that corrupt organizations have not only ranked a dead man in the new monthly ratings, and amazingly had the same man move up in rank the next month?

Don King is the reason for the circus on this fight. Without him, this entire Holmes ducked Page business doesn’t see the light of day. If you have the particulars of the terms and conditions of the contract for Holmes vs Page, by all means post it here. I don’t need to look at it. With King, the location, re-match clause, who the judges are, the ring size, and options for who the winner would fight next ( Likely another Don King fighter ) were reasons Holmes declined the fight. It wasn’t all about the money or Page being a terror in the ring. Far from it.

Although Holmes was not a formally educated man, he was smart enough to know what was good for his career. As I chronicled above, Page was hype. Page failed to win his big fights after his brief high alphabet ranking. Several of the fighters Holmes beat also defeated Page. Holmes fought at least five better fighters in title shots.

Boxing missing Holmes vs Page is hardly a super fighter that never was. I’m sure this board could name at least 50 heavyweight fights that never happened that were of more interest. Do you agree, Titan1?

PS: Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next if he beat Spinks in the first fight?

[My dinner with Conteh]

PS: Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next if he beat Spinks in the first fight?


He was pencilled in to meet his mandatory, Daffy Duck, in March '86 but he priced himself out.

[mr. magoo]

PS: Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next if he beat Spinks in the first fight?


Somebody once mentioned that a possible match with Tony Tubbs for an IBF/WBA unification was in the works, but I'm not exactly sure if it's true.

[JohnThomas1]

One boxing mag said only half jokingly that they expected him to take a very easy defense then offer Marvin Hagler big money for his 50-0 fight.

[ChrisPontius]

Let's all laugh at the simpleton. :lol: :lol: :lol:
After hearing him say this four times, i don't know whether to laugh or to cry anymore :boohoo

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by Mendoza
History tells us Greg Page was never a great fighter. In fact I would argue that Norton, Shavers, Berbick, Witherpsoon, and Spinks were better fighters than Page. Holmes fought all of five of them in title shots. At best Page could have been Holmes 6th best opponent, though fans of Cooney, Bonecrucher Smith, and Weaver might argue for the 6th spot.

In my view Page ranks anywhere from 6-10th best of the opponents that Holmes fought in his title defenses up to the second Spinks fight. Champions hardly get any fuss for not fighting the #6, #7, or #8 man when they were champion. Was Page a hot commodity at one time? Sure. Did Page do enough to earn a shot for a lineal championship? I don’t think so. As I mentioned before, Page was rather poor in his high stakes fights. Had Page won a few he lost, or beaten Bey, perhaps Holmes would have given him a shot. It’s not like Page was giving Holmes a Cooney like pay day. Page and Don King offered Holmes a bit more than his normal title defense. This is true. I am not familiar with the particulars of the contract. I know how Don King operates. Surely the contract to fight Page was not in Holmes best interest. So Holmes avoided Page for one fight, than Page proved to be hype. It’s a minor blip. Most popular champions don’t get this type of backlash, but then again I get the feeling Holmes is not too popular here. Lewis gave up belts to Ruiz, and Byrd. Does this diminish Lewis career. Not in my opinion. However those who don’t care for Lewis might see this as ducking.




Are you aware of how many deals and contract offers actually happen before a fight contract is made? Are you aware that corrupt organizations have not only ranked a dead man in the new monthly ratings, and amazingly had the same man move up in rank the next month?

Don King is the reason for the circus on this fight. Without him, this entire Holmes ducked Page business doesn’t see the light of day. If you have the particulars of the terms and conditions of the contract for Holmes vs Page, by all means post it here. I don’t need to look at it. With King, the location, re-match clause, who the judges are, the ring size, and options for who the winner would fight next ( Likely another Don King fighter ) were reasons Holmes declined the fight. It wasn’t all about the money or Page being a terror in the ring. Far from it.

Although Holmes was not a formally educated man, he was smart enough to know what was good for his career. As I chronicled above, Page was hype. Page failed to win his big fights after his brief high alphabet ranking. Several of the fighters Holmes beat also defeated Page. Holmes fought at least five better fighters in title shots.

Boxing missing Holmes vs Page is hardly a super fighter that never was. I’m sure this board could name at least 50 heavyweight fights that never happened that were of more interest. Do you agree, Titan1?

PS: Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next if he beat Spinks in the first fight?




Great post. And I think Larry would retire. He was an aging fighter and would be at that point 3 years past his prime. There would have to be a huge payday like the Tyson fight to bring him out. Of course, either way he would come back in the 90's to fight Foreman again.

[Bill1234]

So far, it seems to me, that everyone who likes Page *cough* JT *cough* ignores or forgets that Larry dropped Don King in 1983, and refused to deal with him after that. He dealed with King in the Tyson fight, and had to put up with the usuall crap. He had to go see Don after not getting payed when he should of, or not what he was going to get, and he had to curse King out to finally get the money. People blame Larry all too much for being a great buisness man, and being smart with the way he did things as champion. Its very clear and simple, if Larry was offered more to fight Page than he was to fight Frank and Frazier, then you would have seen him in the ring punishing his left glove with Pages face.

[Duodenum]

I think Larry would retire. He was an aging fighter and would be at that point 3 years past his prime.I'm not convinced he would have, although that's certainly the conventional assumption. Anybody could go 49-0 against stiffs, win a championship in their 50th match, and then retire. I really have to wonder if the opportunity to break Joe Louis's record for all time highest number of title defenses would have been too tempting an objective to pass up.

If Larry had been granted the judges decision over Mike Spinks, that would have been Holmes's 21st successful title defense. At 49-0, he'd be six championship wins away from 26 title wins, and perhaps going for 54-0 to break Louis's record would have been too great a temptation to pass up. (I believe he should already have been there by the time of the first match with Mike Spinks, having only defended once in 1984. It doesn't matter to me personally though, since I consider Larry as if he did indeed go 55-0. Mercer is merely icing on the cake.)

Nonetheless, winning over 20 consecutive championship matches as an undefeated boxer was an unprecedented accomplishment, and he did defend it successfully in eight consecutive calendar years. (Louis held his title for over eleven years, but Guinness should have placed an asterisk next to that record because of his inactivity during WW II. While I don't blame Louis at all for his title being on ice, the fact of it remains the same. Ditto Ali's going into exile. I though Larry should have been listed alongside Louis for his eight consecutive years of championship wins.)

[AnthonyJ74]

Come on Bill, lets be sane about this. Page - Snipes on the undercard of Holmes - Witherspoon was billed as the eliminator for Holmes mandatory defense. In other words he new as soon as Page - Snipes was publicised if not earlier. Plain irrefutable fact. Even then he refused and the WBC let him fight Frank on the premise that he then fight Page. Finally when he made for Frazier they threatened to take the title off him, and then did.


And rightfully so! All Holmes had to do was fight Page and be done with it! And I'm not even saying that Page would have beaten Larry(although he stood a great chance), I'm just saying that Holmes owed it to the sport of boxing and to his fans to do the right thing: fight Page! I remember watching the Champions Forever video with Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Frazier, Norton. At the end of the video, each fighter gives a little talk on how they would like to be remember. During Larry's talk, he said that he would like to be remembered as a fighter who gave opportunities to fighters(shot at the title) when they deserved it. Well, he didn't mentiond Greg Page and why he allowed himself to be stripped! LOL

[Bummy Davis]

And rightfully so! All Holmes had to do was fight Page and be done with it! And I'm not even saying that Page would have beaten Larry(although he stood a great chance), I'm just saying that Holmes owed it to the sport of boxing and to his fans to do the right thing: fight Page! I remember watching the Champions Forever video with Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Frazier, Norton. At the end of the video, each fighter gives a little talk on how they would like to be remember. During Larry's talk, he said that he would like to be remembered as a fighter who gave opportunities to fighters(shot at the title) when they deserved it. Well, he didn't mentiond Greg Page and why he allowed himself to be stripped! LOL

:good

[Titan1]

Originally Posted by Mendoza
History tells us Greg Page was never a great fighter. In fact I would argue that Norton, Shavers, Berbick, Witherpsoon, and Spinks were better fighters than Page. Holmes fought all of five of them in title shots. At best Page could have been Holmes 6th best opponent, though fans of Cooney, Bonecrucher Smith, and Weaver might argue for the 6th spot.

In my view Page ranks anywhere from 6-10th best of the opponents that Holmes fought in his title defenses up to the second Spinks fight. Champions hardly get any fuss for not fighting the #6, #7, or #8 man when they were champion. Was Page a hot commodity at one time? Sure. Did Page do enough to earn a shot for a lineal championship? I don’t think so. As I mentioned before, Page was rather poor in his high stakes fights. Had Page won a few he lost, or beaten Bey, perhaps Holmes would have given him a shot. It’s not like Page was giving Holmes a Cooney like pay day. Page and Don King offered Holmes a bit more than his normal title defense. This is true. I am not familiar with the particulars of the contract. I know how Don King operates. Surely the contract to fight Page was not in Holmes best interest. So Holmes avoided Page for one fight, than Page proved to be hype. It’s a minor blip. Most popular champions don’t get this type of backlash, but then again I get the feeling Holmes is not too popular here. Lewis gave up belts to Ruiz, and Byrd. Does this diminish Lewis career. Not in my opinion. However those who don’t care for Lewis might see this as ducking.




Are you aware of how many deals and contract offers actually happen before a fight contract is made? Are you aware that corrupt organizations have not only ranked a dead man in the new monthly ratings, and amazingly had the same man move up in rank the next month?

Don King is the reason for the circus on this fight. Without him, this entire Holmes ducked Page business doesn’t see the light of day. If you have the particulars of the terms and conditions of the contract for Holmes vs Page, by all means post it here. I don’t need to look at it. With King, the location, re-match clause, who the judges are, the ring size, and options for who the winner would fight next ( Likely another Don King fighter ) were reasons Holmes declined the fight. It wasn’t all about the money or Page being a terror in the ring. Far from it.

Although Holmes was not a formally educated man, he was smart enough to know what was good for his career. As I chronicled above, Page was hype. Page failed to win his big fights after his brief high alphabet ranking. Several of the fighters Holmes beat also defeated Page. Holmes fought at least five better fighters in title shots.

Boxing missing Holmes vs Page is hardly a super fighter that never was. I’m sure this board could name at least 50 heavyweight fights that never happened that were of more interest. Do you agree, Titan1?

PS: Does anyone know who Holmes would have fought next if he beat Spinks in the first fight?




You make some valid points, Mendoza, but Larry could've fought Greg if he wanted to. Instead, Marvis Frazier and Scott Frank. Scott Frank. Freakin Scott Frank. That is inexcusable. Holmes should have given Greg the chance at the belt. And in all probability, Greg had a heck of a chance of winning, provided if everything was on. Say what you want about Gregory Edward Page, but the man was definitely talented, and Larry knew this.Hence the avoidance.

[Bill1234]

You make some valid points, Mendoza, but Larry could've fought Greg if he wanted to. Instead, Marvis Frazier and Scott Frank. Scott Frank. Freakin Scott Frank. That is inexcusable. Holmes should have given Greg the chance at the belt. And in all probability, Greg had a heck of a chance of winning, provided if everything was on. Say what you want about Gregory Edward Page, but the man was definitely talented, and Larry knew this.Hence the avoidance.


Larry fought Frank because it was part of the contract with fighting Frazier. It was sort of a combo. Larry signed a contract that said he would fight Frank and Frazier for 5 point something mill. I think it was like 5.5 or something. Everyone is talented that is in the top 10. And yes Page did have more talent then most of the heavyweights out their at the time, but don't forget, Larry still had miles more talent, and he was an ATG. Page vs Holmes would have been the battle of the jabs and techincal aspects, both sections where Holmes was very near the top for all time technical fighters. Larry possesed the better jab, and he would win most jabbing battles. I think it would be close, but gun to my head, I would think Larry would beat Page by about 3 rounds. Another factor is how long the fight is. If its a 15 round fight, then IMO that increases Larry's chances of winning.

[AnthonyJ74]

You make some valid points, Mendoza, but Larry could've fought Greg if he wanted to. Instead, Marvis Frazier and Scott Frank. Scott Frank. Freakin Scott Frank. That is inexcusable. Holmes should have given Greg the chance at the belt. And in all probability, Greg had a heck of a chance of winning, provided if everything was on. Say what you want about Gregory Edward Page, but the man was definitely talented, and Larry knew this.Hence the avoidance.

Exactly! And if Larry felt that he deserved more money to fight Page, then the next question should have been, why? What was it about Page that you felt you deserved more money for fighting? The money was ok to fight Frank and Frazier, but Larry felt Page was worth more? LOL......

[Bill1234]

Exactly! And if Larry felt that he deserved more money to fight Page, then the next question should have been, why? What was it about Page that you felt you deserved more money for fighting? The money was ok to fight Frank and Frazier, but Larry felt Page was worth more? LOL......


Well, for one thing, Larry was the champion and in damn near all of championship fights before Larry was champion, the champ always got more money. But they never wanted that with Larry. He fought the politics for that. Then he went and fought the oppenents. I would say 85% of Holmes fights that didn't happen were because of politics or King. As for the other 15%, its more the fighters. Notice "fighters" is plural. Its almost never just 1 fighters fault. Usually the other fighter has something to do with it, or could have done something different. Like Coetzee-Holmes, if Coetzee agreed to fight in Vegas the first time, then they were going to fight. The 2nd time the promoter (I think it was something Smith) got sent to jail for basically stealing money from the bank, thus where he got all of his money for the huge paydays for Holmes and Coetzee. So then their fight fell apart. Larry didn't fight Page mainly because of politics. If Larry was going to get the payday he wanted, or close to it, then you would have seen him whipping Page's ass.

[AnthonyJ74]

Well, for one thing, Larry was the champion and in damn near all of championship fights before Larry was champion, the champ always got more money. But they never wanted that with Larry. He fought the politics for that. Then he went and fought the oppenents. I would say 85% of Holmes fights that didn't happen were because of politics or King. As for the other 15%, its more the fighters. Notice "fighters" is plural. Its almost never just 1 fighters fault. Usually the other fighter has something to do with it, or could have done something different. Like Coetzee-Holmes, if Coetzee agreed to fight in Vegas the first time, then they were going to fight. The 2nd time the promoter (I think it was something Smith) got sent to jail for basically stealing money from the bank, thus where he got all of his money for the huge paydays for Holmes and Coetzee. So then their fight fell apart. Larry didn't fight Page mainly because of politics. If Larry was going to get the payday he wanted, or close to it, then you would have seen him whipping Page's ass.

But why was Larry so picky about his purse when it concerned Greg Page? IF Page was no better than most of the other fighters that Holmes fought at the time, why all of a sudden decide to take issue with the money for a Page fight?

[Bill1234]

But why was Larry so picky about his purse when it concerned Greg Page? IF Page was no better than most of the other fighters that Holmes fought at the time, why all of a sudden decide to take issue with the money for a Page fight?

He was always picky about his purses. All of the other times he was able to get what he wanted, but not with Page. He made more money fighting low risk fights like Frazier and Frank, then he would have with a fight with Page. Thats one of the reasons he fought Frazier instead of Page.

[mr. magoo]

He was always picky about his purses. All of the other times he was able to get what he wanted, but not with Page. He made more money fighting low risk fights like Frazier and Frank, then he would have with a fight with Page. Thats one of the reasons he fought Frazier instead of Page.

I don't even think that it was about risk at any level. In order to make the Page fight and retain the WBC title, Holmes would have had to play by King's rules and that just wasn't going to happen. He and Don parted ways, and as soon as it was announced that Holmes-Page was off, King began his whole propaganda on how Holmes wasn't the true champion.

[Bill1234]

I don't even think that it was about risk at any level. In order to make the Page fight and retain the WBC title, Holmes would have had to play by King's rules and that just wasn't going to happen. He and Don parted ways, and as soon as it was announced that Holmes-Page was off, King began his whole propaganda on how Holmes wasn't the true champion.

Exactly. Ive been saying that from the start.

[AnthonyJ74]

He was always picky about his purses. All of the other times he was able to get what he wanted, but not with Page. He made more money fighting low risk fights like Frazier and Frank, then he would have with a fight with Page. Thats one of the reasons he fought Frazier instead of Page.

You highlighted my point! Larry obviously thought that Greg Page was a high-risk fight; therefore, he fought easier opponents instead of fighting his mandatory.

[JohnThomas1]

Great post. And I think Larry would retire. He was an aging fighter and would be at that point 3 years past his prime. There would have to be a huge payday like the Tyson fight to bring him out. Of course, either way he would come back in the 90's to fight Foreman again.

Do you mean Larry would retire at 49-0? With all your immense Larry knowledge do you not know he was chasing the coveted 50-0?

[JohnThomas1]

And rightfully so! All Holmes had to do was fight Page and be done with it! And I'm not even saying that Page would have beaten Larry(although he stood a great chance), I'm just saying that Holmes owed it to the sport of boxing and to his fans to do the right thing: fight Page! I remember watching the Champions Forever video with Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Frazier, Norton. At the end of the video, each fighter gives a little talk on how they would like to be remember. During Larry's talk, he said that he would like to be remembered as a fighter who gave opportunities to fighters(shot at the title) when they deserved it. Well, he didn't mentiond Greg Page and why he allowed himself to be stripped! LOL

I bet!

:lol:

[JohnThomas1]

You highlighted my point! Larry obviously thought that Greg Page was a high-risk fight; therefore, he fought easier opponents instead of fighting his mandatory.

You've kicked some serious ass in here, and are very much in charge of the facts unlike the other side. Good work.

[Mendoza]

You make some valid points, Mendoza, but Larry could've fought Greg if he wanted to. Instead, Marvis Frazier and Scott Frank. Scott Frank. Freakin Scott Frank. That is inexcusable. Holmes should have given Greg the chance at the belt. And in all probability, Greg had a heck of a chance of winning, provided if everything was on. Say what you want about Gregory Edward Page, but the man was definitely talented, and Larry knew this.Hence the avoidance.

I agree. Holmes as champion could have taken the fight. The thing to focus on here is the terms and conditions of the contract, and the sphere of influences that Don King had on the match. The timing was also not ideal for Holmes, who was a very busy fighter in 1983.

Remember in boxing, the promoter picks his own judges. Don King could have very well picked WBC Judge Herb Santos, who was the minority judge in the Witherpsoon fight or WBC Judge Herb Tabat who was the minority judge in the Norton fight, and somehow had a 14-1 clean win for Holmes in the Berbick fight a bit too on his score card. Both judges were “ in “ with Jose Sulliman and Don King. If you were Larry Holmes, and you suspected an unfavorable contract from Don King would you sign such a contract? NFW! That stands for No F’n Way.

I think part of the reason Holmes did not fight Page was he wasn’t steering the ship on the match. Holmes was very active in 1983. He fought four times ( Who was the last heavyweight champion to do that? ), with one of the matches being vs a tough Witherspoon. It would be a lot to ask of any champion to fight both Witherspoon, and Page in a 5 month period, then fight two other un-defeated fighters in Frank and M. Frazier, especially if Don King was holding a serrated contract over Holmes head. See my point?

Regarding Frank, he wasn’t that bad. Frank beat guys who got title shots from Ali and Frazier, and was battle tested and un-defeated coming into the match. So how come Ali or Frazier don’t get grilled for fighting easier opponents in Wepner and Stander, who Gasp…knocked them down and near stunned them, while Holmes who was making 4 title defenses in a year gets grilled for fighting Frank? I assure you, both Ali and Frazier could have fought much better competition if they chose to.

In closing I agree that Holmes should have fought Page. It was a missed fight for sure, but it was not a missed fight that registers high on the Richter scale of histories missed fights. Not even close. I do believe if Page defeated Bey in 1984, there is a good chance that Holmes fights Page next on his contract more in Holmes favor.

[Bigcat]

Larry did amongst some very comfortable challengers take on a few who once Holmes retired won a version of the title. Berbick, Witherspoon etc. a few were unbeaten when they faced him as challengers and in fact never even boxed again (Leroy Jones..) He had humility and a massive heart getting up to knock men out after terrible knockdowns.. Shavers, Snipes..
Larry is and i always stand by this.. One of the best five heavyweights of all time.. On technical ability.. Pure technician..

[Duodenum]

He was always picky about his purses. All of the other times he was able to get what he wanted, but not with Page. He made more money fighting low risk fights like Frazier and Frank, then he would have with a fight with Page. Thats one of the reasons he fought Frazier instead of Page.And the end justifies the means. It might be pointed out that Larry isn't shining shoes in front of Miami's Fountainbleu Hotel today, or living under a highway overpass, or out of his car, or in a jail like Don King's own Mike Dokes, or sitting in a wheelchair like Page himself, who Larry's able to help out today through his support of Cooney's F.I.S.T. initiative. (By the way, where are the Kings and Arums when it comes to the support of who made them rich?)

Speaking of Cooney, if the IBHOF wants to redeem itself for all their crappy selections, they might want to consider inducting Gerry as a non-participant for his charitable work on behalf of the retired boxers King and Arum dispose of after their usefulness to them has expired.

[mr. magoo]

And the end justifies the means. It might be pointed out that Larry isn't shining shoes in front of Miami's Fountainbleu Hotel today, or living under a highway overpass, or out of his car, or in a jail like Don King's own Mike Dokes, or sitting in a wheelchair like Page himself, who Larry's able to help out today through his support of Cooney's F.I.S.T. initiative. (By the way, where are the King's and Arum's when it comes to the support of who made them rich?)

Speaking of Cooney, if the IBHOF wants to redeem itself for all their crappy selections, they might want to consider inducting Gerry as a non-participant for his charitable work on behalf of the retired boxers King and Arum dispose of after their usefulness to them has expired.

Excellent points here.

King, Arum and probably numerous other promotors in the history of the sport have sucked the blood out of fighters like it was as normal as breathing oxygen, yet a guy like Holmes gives part of his earnings back to help his peers in the sport, and is remembered by many as being a jerk.

Something wrong with that picture if you ask me. :huh

[Titan1]

And the end justifies the means. It might be pointed out that Larry isn't shining shoes in front of Miami's Fountainbleu Hotel today, or living under a highway overpass, or out of his car, or in a jail like Don King's own Mike Dokes, or sitting in a wheelchair like Page himself, who Larry's able to help out today through his support of Cooney's F.I.S.T. initiative. (By the way, where are the King's and Arum's when it comes to the support of who made them rich?)

Speaking of Cooney, if the IBHOF wants to redeem itself for all their crappy selections, they might want to consider inducting Gerry as a non-participant for his charitable work on behalf of the retired boxers King and Arum dispose of after their usefulness to them has expired.

Him and Alex Ramos.

[Duodenum]

Him and Alex Ramos.Yes, and Alex has also been previously mentioned on ESB as a potential IBHOF inductee in connection with his post career work.

[Duodenum]

Excellent points here.

King, Arum and probably numerous other promotors in the history of the sport have sucked the blood out of fighters like it was as normal as breathing oxygen, yet a guy like Holmes gives part of his earnings back to help his peers in the sport, and is remembered by many as being a jerk.

Something wrong with that picture if you ask me. :huhMy chiropractor is a big Larry Holmes fan, and he has prominently displayed a photograph of him shaking hands with the champ, just the two of them, on a sidewalk in Easton, not long after Larry established himself as the top heavyweight in action. There are countless such portraits of Holmes with regular fans on the street, one on one. (How many such fan pictures of Ali are floating about?)

The press portrays Larry as being a jerk, but the press is fundamentally monarchist, and there seems to be a disconnect between how they frame Holmes, and how the general public perceives him. Like Elvis, Ali is no "man of the people" anymore (if he ever was), but a cloistered member of society's elite. He has long since become apotheosized, whereas Larry remains more accessible and better understood as "one of us." He is substance, not image. He's understood as a clear headed and tough minded individual who doesn't suffer fools gladly. He is not somebody who's projected to be all things to all people.

We can hardly take care of others if we don't take care of ourselves first. Holmes has, and that merits respect, whereas the press emphasizes pity and sympathy for "victims." Larry's real, not an iconic symbol, and not somebody with whom liberties are to be taken, but someone whose boundaries are to be respected. He is less regarded as a phony than the professional salesman Foreman has become. He's stood up for himself, and that's worthy of admiration.

He is far more intelligent than he is articulate, and he appears to realize that there is a separation between how the media portrays him, and how boxing fans familiar with his story do. For a young man with an eighth grade education to undermine the exploitative efforts of a parasite like King is an achievement worthy of high praise. An awful lot of brainpower was in the ring when Larry and Mike Spinks collided. They may have both been blasted in the ring by Tyson, but at the end of the day, who's really better off?

(Ditto for Tunney and Dempsey. One completely avoided being wiped out by the Great Depression, and the other rebuilt his fortune after it, without needing to come out of retirement, trading on his good name as Elvis's estate did after he died.)

Holmes has his limits, and he has a temper, and we appreciate that because we share those traits. Let Ali have the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I'd rather enjoy a different variety of freedom, one which doesn't entail being displayed as a public exhibit. Larry has mastered the use of a very simple, magic word: "No."

[JIm Broughton]

Every HW champ has defended his title against his fair share of bums and Larry's no exception. Of all the HW champs I think it's fair to say that Ali probably fought the best quality opposition. Louis and Johnson as well as Dempsey and Marciano did'nt exactly fight stellar opposition either. Maybe Larry should have fought Page and given Weaver or Witherspoon a rematch to better his legacy as a defending champion. Ali fought Frazier and Norton 3 times even after both were bounced all over the ring by Foreman after fighting Ali previously and I think Larry should have done the same to Mike or Tim but Larry would'nt have any of it. By the time he fought Witherspoon it was clear that Larry was beginning to fade a bit. Still a very good fighter with plenty of determination but looking somewhat far removed from the razor sharp technician who gave Shavers a boxing lesson in thier first encounter. I think the Witherspoon fight convinced Larry that it was time to start making the most money with the least amount of risk in the face of rapidly deteriorating skills. Can't fault him for that but it certainly did'nt help his quality of opposition rating. Maybe if he rematched Tim right away and beat him more convincigly then hung 'em up it would have helped his legacy but it's all speculation anyway. At his best Holmes ranks way up there and would have been too much for all but a few of the All time greats.

[mr. magoo]

My chiropractor is a big Larry Holmes fan, and he has prominently displayed a photograph of him shaking hands with the champ, just the two of them, on a sidewalk in Easton, not long after Larry established himself as the top heavyweight in action. There are countless such portraits of Holmes with regular fans on the street, one on one. (How many such fan pictures of Ali are floating about?)

The press portrays Larry as being a jerk, but the press is fundamentally monarchist, and there seems to be a disconnect between how they frame Holmes, and how the general public perceives him. Like Elvis, Ali is no "man of the people" anymore (if he ever was), but a cloistered member of society's elite. He has long since become apotheosized, whereas Larry remains more accessible and better understood as "one of us." He is substance, not image. He's understood as a clear headed and tough minded individual who doesn't suffer fools gladly. He is not somebody who's projected to be all things to all people.

We can hardly take care of others if we don't take care of ourselves first. Holmes has, and that merits respect, whereas the press emphasizes pity and sympathy for "victims." Larry's real, not an iconic symbol, and not somebody with whom liberties are to be taken, but someone whose boundaries are to be respected. He is less regarded as a phony than the professional salesman Foreman has become. He's stood up for himself, and that's worthy of admiration.

He is far more intelligent than he is articulate, and he appears to realize that there is a separation between how the media portrays him, and how boxing fans familiar with his story do. For a young man with an eighth grade education to undermine the exploitative efforts of a parasite like King is an achievement worthy of high praise. An awful lot of brainpower was in the ring when Larry and Mike Spinks collided. They may have both been blasted in the ring by Tyson, but at the end of the day, who's really better off?

(Ditto for Tunney and Dempsey. One completely avoided being wiped out by the Great Depression, and the other rebuilt his fortune after it, without needing to come out of retirement, trading on his good name as Elvis's estate did after he died.)

Holmes has his limits, and he has a temper, and we appreciate that because we share those traits. Let Ali have the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I'd rather enjoy a different variety of freedom, one which doesn't entail being displayed as a public exhibit. Larry has mastered the use of a very simple, magic word: "No."

I have officially decided who I'm voting for in the next election.

GO DUODENUM !!!!!! :good

[Bill1234]

You highlighted my point! Larry obviously thought that Greg Page was a high-risk fight; therefore, he fought easier opponents instead of fighting his mandatory.


Larry didn't think Page was a high risk oppenent, just higher than Frazier and Frank. If Larry would get more money than he did for those fights to fight Page, then you would have seen Larry beat the piss out of Page. And again, why is everyone so critical of Larry if they would still say that his reign was shit, even if he fought those people?

[ChrisPontius]

And again, why is everyone so critical of Larry if they would still say that his reign was shit, even if he fought those people?

:|

I can guarantee you 100% that if he fought at least two of the deserving challengers (Thomas, Page, Dokes, Coetzee) instead of jokes like Frazier, Rodriguez et al, as well as not dropping his belt to avoid one AND have a few rematches after his dead-even fights instead of avoiding every single one of them (Norton, Witherspoon and Williams), he would be a lot higher regarded (top3 for sure) and would not be rightfully critized for it.


Did i mention yet that fanboys like you only turn people against Holmes rather than for him?

[My dinner with Conteh]

Larry didn't think Page was a high risk oppenent, just higher than Frazier and Frank. If Larry would get more money than he did for those fights to fight Page, then you would have seen Larry beat the piss out of Page. And again, why is everyone so critical of Larry if they would still say that his reign was shit, even if he fought those people?


His purse for Page would have been bigger than the one he got for Frank. He agreed to fight Page after Frank and Frazier, then cried off with his phoney "Don King's screwing me" excuse. Funny that he didn't want to leave King after being jobbed out of a few bucks after the Cobb fight.

[Bill1234]

My chiropractor is a big Larry Holmes fan, and he has prominently displayed a photograph of him shaking hands with the champ, just the two of them, on a sidewalk in Easton, not long after Larry established himself as the top heavyweight in action. There are countless such portraits of Holmes with regular fans on the street, one on one. (How many such fan pictures of Ali are floating about?)

The press portrays Larry as being a jerk, but the press is fundamentally monarchist, and there seems to be a disconnect between how they frame Holmes, and how the general public perceives him. Like Elvis, Ali is no "man of the people" anymore (if he ever was), but a cloistered member of society's elite. He has long since become apotheosized, whereas Larry remains more accessible and better understood as "one of us." He is substance, not image. He's understood as a clear headed and tough minded individual who doesn't suffer fools gladly. He is not somebody who's projected to be all things to all people.

We can hardly take care of others if we don't take care of ourselves first. Holmes has, and that merits respect, whereas the press emphasizes pity and sympathy for "victims." Larry's real, not an iconic symbol, and not somebody with whom liberties are to be taken, but someone whose boundaries are to be respected. He is less regarded as a phony than the professional salesman Foreman has become. He's stood up for himself, and that's worthy of admiration.

He is far more intelligent than he is articulate, and he appears to realize that there is a separation between how the media portrays him, and how boxing fans familiar with his story do. For a young man with an eighth grade education to undermine the exploitative efforts of a parasite like King is an achievement worthy of high praise. An awful lot of brainpower was in the ring when Larry and Mike Spinks collided. They may have both been blasted in the ring by Tyson, but at the end of the day, who's really better off?

(Ditto for Tunney and Dempsey. One completely avoided being wiped out by the Great Depression, and the other rebuilt his fortune after it, without needing to come out of retirement, trading on his good name as Elvis's estate did after he died.)

Holmes has his limits, and he has a temper, and we appreciate that because we share those traits. Let Ali have the Presidential Medal of Freedom. I'd rather enjoy a different variety of freedom, one which doesn't entail being displayed as a public exhibit. Larry has mastered the use of a very simple, magic word: "No."


:clap: 5 star post. I agree with everything on it. The whole time Ive been on ESB Ive said that Larry's a great guy regardless what he said when he was pissed off. Larry just recently got the boy of steel award for donating a lot of money to the fight against cancer. He basicaly pays for all of the saint anthony's youth center, and he loses about $2,000 a month on his gym with the taxes. $15 a month from 30-40 people (with some skipping out) won't pay for $4,000 a month in taxes for it. Larry is just like any other man, and thats what he wants. Don't get me wrong, he likes the attention he gets and all, he just prefers to be known as just another guy. He doesn't spoil his family either. He buys them 1 house that they want, but they have to pay taxes and all. What they do after that is up to them, and Larry won't help unless they really need it. He is one of the few remaining boxers that kept their boxing money and make millions on the side with endorsements, buisnesses, and real estate.

Foreman lost his boxing money (which is why he made his comeback), and he had that huge phoney smile on, and people bought it. I read an interview with Larry, and the reporter asked him that if he ran for mayor of Easton, what party would he be? Larry said that republicans have done a lot for him, and helped make him make a lot of money, but he would run as a democrat to help the average joe. Larry may only have a 7th grade education, but he has more street smarts and common sence than most.

People remember him for his comment about Marciano, and thats just wrong. Sure, he was wrong to say it, but it wasn't uncalled for. Its not like it came out of nowhere. It was all of the anger that was built up inside of him. No one liked him as champion. People treated him like he was a scum bag. Going into the Ali fight everyone said "You don't hold a candle light to Ali" or "Ali will knock you out" then when Larry says different, he's the bad guy. It was a lose-lose situation for him. If he lost to Ali, then he would get "I told you so, you aint nothin" and when he beat Ali (unwillingly) he got "Whats wrong with you? Beating up a poor, old, defenceless Ali like that.".

Then 2 years later of being hated just because he beat Ali, Cooney came along. Someone tried to kill him with a drive through shooting at his resturant. He got death threats, insults, and he had to watch his back everyday. It got to the point where he couldn't even go out anywhere with out 2 body gaurds or a gun. It was just wrong. He goes and beats the piss out of Cooney regardless of all of the racial shit he had to go through. People hated him for beating Cooney.

Then came the Spinks fight. Marciano's family (mainly Peter) flat out told Larry they were praying he would lose and would be happy if he did. Larry was pissed at that. Its just wrong to say that. Larry was 3 years past his prime, and Larry was a ton slower and couldn't keep up the same work rate he could when he was younger. It was a close fight that could have gone either way. They gave it to Spinks. Marciano's family (again, mainly Peter) was egging Larry on along with the press. Larry was already thrown into a whole new dimension of pissed off because he lost his title, then he was even more pissed off that everyone was egging him on and happy. He could have said a lot worse.

He beat the piss out of Spinks in the rematch, and they gave Spinks the decision, and Larry got robbed. So Larry is extremely pissed off again. He new they wouldn't let him have his title back, regardless if he earned it. Then he said what he thought about the judges. Its ashame people think that Larry is a bitter, grumpy, jack ass in person because of what he said when he was mad as hell. He's a great guy who loves to have fun and joke around.

[Bill1234]

I can guarantee you 100% that if he fought at least two of the deserving challengers (Thomas, Page, Dokes, Coetzee) instead of jokes like Frazier, Rodriguez et al, as well as not dropping his belt to avoid one AND have a few rematches after his dead-even fights instead of avoiding every single one of them (Norton, Witherspoon and Williams), he would be a lot higher regarded (top3 for sure) and would not be rightfully critized for it.


Why would Norton deserve a rematch? Getting knocked out by Shavers doesn't get you a rematch, just thought I'd let you know ass hole. He was going to fight Coetzee, but the promoter dropped out, they couldn't agree on location etc. King was going to prevent the titlists from unifying. You didn't see the other Titlists unifying did you? No. How can you consider the Witherspoon fight dead even? Sure it was close, but dead even? No. Same with Williams.

:fy

[Bill1234]

His purse for Page would have been bigger than the one he got for Frank. He agreed to fight Page after Frank and Frazier, then cried off with his phoney "Don King's screwing me" excuse. Funny that he didn't want to leave King after being jobbed out of a few bucks after the Cobb fight.

But Larry was in a combo contract for Frazier and Frank. He signed to fight both of them before the Page fight was brought up. He left King because he was tired of being treated like shit, and tired of being cheated out of money. Wouldn't you leave if it was happening to you for 8 years? Larry cursed King out more times then you can imagine. One of the main reasons Larry left King, and refused to deal with him, was because King threatened him. Larry mentioned switching promoters, and King threatened to have his legs broken. Larry carried a pistol around with him just in case. Once King threatened Larry, that was it, he was gone. He promoted his own fights. People like to beleive what the press say, but theres always so much more than that.

[mr. magoo]

:clap: 5 star post. I agree with everything on it. The whole time Ive been on ESB Ive said that Larry's a great guy regardless what he said when he was pissed off. Larry just recently got the boy of steel award for donating a lot of money to the fight against cancer. He basicaly pays for all of the saint anthony's youth center, and he loses about $2,000 a month on his gym with the taxes. $15 a month from 30-40 people (with some skipping out) won't pay for $4,000 a month in taxes for it. Larry is just like any other man, and thats what he wants. Don't get me wrong, he likes the attention he gets and all, he just prefers to be known as just another guy. He doesn't spoil his family either. He buys them 1 house that they want, but they have to pay taxes and all. What they do after that is up to them, and Larry won't help unless they really need it. He is one of the few remaining boxers that kept their boxing money and make millions on the side with endorsements, buisnesses, and real estate.

Foreman lost his boxing money (which is why he made his comeback), and he had that huge phoney smile on, and people bought it. I read an interview with Larry, and the reporter asked him that if he ran for mayor of Easton, what party would he be? Larry said that republicans have done a lot for him, and helped make him make a lot of money, but he would run as a democrat to help the average joe. Larry may only have a 7th grade education, but he has more street smarts and common sence than most.

People remember him for his comment about Marciano, and thats just wrong. Sure, he was wrong to say it, but it wasn't uncalled for. Its not like it came out of nowhere. It was all of the anger that was built up inside of him. No one liked him as champion. People treated him like he was a scum bag. Going into the Ali fight everyone said "You don't hold a candle light to Ali" or "Ali will knock you out" then when Larry says different, he's the bad guy. It was a lose-lose situation for him. If he lost to Ali, then he would get "I told you so, you aint nothin" and when he beat Ali (unwillingly) he got "Whats wrong with you? Beating up a poor, old, defenceless Ali like that.".

Then 2 years later of being hated just because he beat Ali, Cooney came along. Someone tried to kill him with a drive through shooting at his resturant. He got death threats, insults, and he had to watch his back everyday. It got to the point where he couldn't even go out anywhere with out 2 body gaurds or a gun. It was just wrong. He goes and beats the piss out of Cooney regardless of all of the racial shit he had to go through. People hated him for beating Cooney.

Then came the Spinks fight. Marciano's family (mainly Peter) flat out told Larry they were praying he would lose and would be happy if he did. Larry was pissed at that. Its just wrong to say that. Larry was 3 years past his prime, and Larry was a ton slower and couldn't keep up the same work rate he could when he was younger. It was a close fight that could have gone either way. They gave it to Spinks. Marciano's family (again, mainly Peter) was egging Larry on along with the press. Larry was already thrown into a whole new dimension of pissed off because he lost his title, then he was even more pissed off that everyone was egging him on and happy. He could have said a lot worse.

He beat the piss out of Spinks in the rematch, and they gave Spinks the decision, and Larry got robbed. So Larry is extremely pissed off again. He new they wouldn't let him have his title back, regardless if he earned it. Then he said what he thought about the judges. Its ashame people think that Larry is a bitter, grumpy, jack ass in person because of what he said when he was mad as hell. He's a great guy who loves to have fun and joke around.

Nice post Bill,

Sadly, Larry was not viewed as a champion of the people during his title days. Fortunately, however he has greatly redeemed himself in life after boxing. There are few great athletes particularly boxers who give anything significant back to the game or society. Larry is one of the few who truly fit the bill as being a man for the people. As you already stated, the Marciano incident was a mere reflection of their hatred, and not Larry's. Only a select few people truly have the insite to understand this.

[Bill1234]

Nice post Bill,

Sadly, Larry was not viewed as a champion of the people during his title days. Fortunately, however he has greatly redeemed himself in life after boxing. There are few great athletes particularly boxers who give anything significant back to the game or society. Larry is one of the few who truly fit the bill as being a man for the people. As you already stated, the Marciano incident was a mere reflection of their hatred, and not Larry's. Only a select few people truly have the insite to understand this.


Exactly.

[ChrisPontius]

Why would Norton deserve a rematch? Getting knocked out by Shavers doesn't get you a rematch, just thought I'd let you know ass hole.


We've gone over this myriads of times but because it didn't reach your brain the first four times, i will repeat it:

A very close fight against Norton for the title DOES earn you a rematch and this was BEFORE Norton got iced in one. Did you hear Holmes say "I aint gonna rematch Norton because he's about to get knocked out in one round, a few months from now, i checked Boxrec" ?


He was going to fight Coetzee, but the promoter dropped out, they couldn't agree on location etc. King was going to prevent the titlists from unifying. You didn't see the other Titlists unifying did you? No. How can you consider the Witherspoon fight dead even? Sure it was close, but dead even? No. Same with Williams.

Excuses, excuses excuses. Like i said, wanting Holmes to fight all of them is not realistic (not many champs did), but he could've at least fought a few of those seven big missers on his resume.

[ChrisPontius]

Nice post Bill,

Sadly, Larry was not viewed as a champion of the people during his title days. Fortunately, however he has greatly redeemed himself in life after boxing. There are few great athletes particularly boxers who give anything significant back to the game or society. Larry is one of the few who truly fit the bill as being a man for the people. As you already stated, the Marciano incident was a mere reflection of their hatred, and not Larry's. Only a select few people truly have the insite to understand this.

That fact that he wasn't very charismatic or good with the press surely made life hard for him.

For instance, Ali could fight Evangelista's and go without facing a mandatory for years without being stripped, because he was Ali. Holmes didn't have that priviledge and as a result he was stripped of the only belt around when he refused to fight the mandatory, Page, because Frazier was the bigger fight obviously. It sucks for him that he didn't get that free pass that Ali got, but if he wants to be seen as a champion, why didn't he just face his mandatory and do his job, like a champion is supposed to ?

[mr. magoo]

That fact that he wasn't very charismatic or good with the press surely made life hard for him.

For instance, Ali could fight Evangelista's and go without facing a mandatory for years without being stripped, because he was Ali. Holmes didn't have that priviledge and as a result he was stripped of the only belt around when he refused to fight the mandatory, Page, because Frazier was the bigger fight obviously. It sucks for him that he didn't get that free pass that Ali got, but if he wants to be seen as a champion, why didn't he just face his mandatory and do his job, like a champion is supposed to ?

I agree with what you're saying, but the conversation wasn't really about Holmes not facing his mandatories, but rather about his public image effected for reasons other than who he fought or didn't fight.

[Bill1234]

That fact that he wasn't very charismatic or good with the press surely made life hard for him.

For instance, Ali could fight Evangelista's and go without facing a mandatory for years without being stripped, because he was Ali. Holmes didn't have that priviledge and as a result he was stripped of the only belt around when he refused to fight the mandatory, Page, because Frazier was the bigger fight obviously. It sucks for him that he didn't get that free pass that Ali got, but if he wants to be seen as a champion, why didn't he just face his mandatory and do his job, like a champion is supposed to ?


Ok, so you give Ali a free pass, but not Holmes. That makes a lot of sence. Hey everyone, lets give Ali a free pass because he fucking Muhammad Ali. But not Larry because he gets pissed off and is an honest man! Yeah, lets go make asses of our selves like I am now!

[ChrisPontius]

Ok, so you give Ali a free pass, but not Holmes. That makes a lot of sence. Hey everyone, lets give Ali a free pass because he fucking Muhammad Ali. But not Larry because he gets pissed off and is an honest man! Yeah, lets go make asses of our selves like I am now!

I said the governing bodies and most the public gave him a free pass, not me.

[Bill1234]

I said the governing bodies and most the public gave him a free pass, not me.


Then why don't you mention it?

[My dinner with Conteh]

Wouldn't you leave if it was happening to you for 8 years?


It took The Mallard eight years for it to sink in? His seventh grade education really did let him down then. :yep




People like to beleive what the press say, but theres always so much more than that.


You just believe what Larry says, how about reading up on other sources, goldfish. :good

[My dinner with Conteh]

But Larry was in a combo contract for Frazier and Frank. He signed to fight both of them before the Page fight was brought up.


...on the proviso he met Page afterwards. They announced a week before the Frazier fight that he merely had to 'sign' to fight Page, has this sunk in 'Goldfish'? To sign. Not fight the week after. SIGN SIGN FUCKING SIGN. :hey

[ChrisPontius]

Then why don't you mention it?

I don't understand your question.

[Bill1234]

It took The Mallard eight years for it to sink in? His seventh grade education really did let him down then. :yep







You just believe what Larry says, how about reading up on other sources, goldfish. :good



No, thats when Larry knew he could make just as much money on his own. And also, wouldn't you say Larry knows better than anyone else about his troubles with King?

[TIGEREDGE]

i wouldn't say cooney, smith, witherspoon, norton, shavers, leon spinks, berbick Renaldo Snipes and a few others I forget were bums. those guys would have reigned supreme in todays HWD

Holmes proved himself to be great on the road to winning the title by beating the likes of roy williams, earnie shavers, norton with 1 arm. cooney is now as underated as he was overated before he lost to spinks and holmes

Gerry was good and very dangerous when he fought holmes. he just wasn't at holmes level of greatness

What about a 40 plus year old holmes pushing evander holyfield and oliver mcall mccall close. what about the win over mercer. he was a quality fighter as holyfield and lewis will attest

[AnthonyJ74]

i wouldn't say cooney, smith, witherspoon, norton, shavers, leon spinks, berbick Renaldo Snipes and a few others I forget were bums. those guys would have reigned supreme in todays HWD

Holmes proved himself to be great on the road to winning the title by beating the likes of roy williams, earnie shavers, norton with 1 arm. cooney is now as underated as he was overated before he lost to spinks and holmes

Gerry was good and very dangerous when he fought holmes. he just wasn't at holmes level of greatness

What about a 40 plus year old holmes pushing evander holyfield and oliver mcall mccall close. what about the win over mercer. he was a quality fighter as holyfield and lewis will attest

He was a quality fighter; I totally agree with you. But he was also a fighter who, for the last few years of his title reign, avoided the better fighters in favor of the easier marks.

[JohnThomas1]

Then why don't you mention it?

He did mention it for gods sake, it's exactly what he said!! You need to read things a few times, let it sink in and then post Bill.

[TIGEREDGE]

He was a quality fighter; I totally agree with you. But he was also a fighter who, for the last few years of his title reign, avoided the better fighters in favor of the easier marks.

which heavyweight champion ever chose the hard route. Ali never fought the best contendors during his final years. holmes and foreman were left out of the picture.

don't get me wrong shavers, lyle, norton (who beat ali 3rd time no doubt) and a few other were very worthy. there was better around

Holmes resume on the way to the title was better most other hw champions