'The Truth'?

[Holmes' Jab]

In terms of pure ability, and 'relative' overall potential where exactly would you rate a peak, inshape Carl Williams in comparison to the other lost generation HW's of the 80's? :think

[mcvey]

In terms of pure ability, and 'relative' overall potential where exactly would you rate a peak, inshape Carl Williams in comparison to the other lost generation HW's of the 80's? :think
Fine skill but his durability let him down imo.

[Holmes' Jab]

Yeah I agree with that, his chin was the main achillies heel. I'd definitely rank him above the likes of Tucker, maybe Tubbs and Dokes too. He was a more natural fighter and moved far better than the likes of a Bruno for example, had a very good jab and a good dose of skill. Reasonable power too. I don't think it's unreasonable to put him nearly up there with Witherspoon, Thomas and Weaver in terms of talent.

He had notable wins against Bert Cooper and Quick Tillis (one sided decision) and also performed very well in losing against Holmes. The manner of the Tyson defeat (legit stoppage or not?) probably took quite a good deal out of him, but nonetheless he performed pretty well against Witherspoon soon afterwards (despite both being faded fighters somewhat, certinaly Williams). My take:


1. Witherspoon
2. Thomas
3. Berbick
4. Weaver
5. Williams
6. Dokes

[JohnThomas1]

My take:

1. Witherspoon
2. Thomas
3. Berbick
4. Weaver
5. Williams
6. Dokes

:fire

[Russell]

I've heard that Williams outjabbed Holmes during their fight???

[Holmes' Jab]

:fire


Oops, I forgot to include a tip-top Super Greg. :patsch


Put him in there ahead of Williams and Dokes and that'd be about right (argument for top 3 pure ability wise). :good

[Holmes' Jab]

I've heard that Williams outjabbed Holmes during their fight???


Yeah he proved a very big handful indeed and more than held his own in the jabbing contest overall, perhaps edging it on occasions. Good action overall, and a tough, close fight to score. Larry just squeaked it down the stretch, though.


IIRC, I had Holmes winning 8-6-1 in rounds. Williams would've given even a peak Holmes a tough fight :good

[mr. magoo]

Carl Williams' biggest weakness was the left hook. He was floored quite frequently and almost all of his knockdowns were the result of sharp lefts from his opponents. He also had an issue with activity and staying in good shape. An aging Williams who nearly took a prime Tommy Morrison apart gave us a glimpse of what he might have been had his career been handled differently. The problem is, no one could ever correct his soft spot for getting tagged with the left.

[Holmes' Jab]

Carl Williams' biggest weakness was the left hook. He was floored quite frequently and almost all of his knockdowns were the result of sharp lefts from his opponents. He also had an issue with activity and staying in good shape. An aging Williams who nearly took a prime Tommy Morrison apart gave us a glimpse of what he might have been had his career been handled differently. The problem is, no one could ever correct his soft spot for getting tagged with the left.


Yeah, agree there.

[Bigcat]

Superbly conditioned , great power, fabulous jab and brave as hell.. Maybee too brave and held that chin up there like a fucking lantern..

He had an OK chin but he wasn't elusive as he could have been..

He always got up and was stopped on his feet.. Too brave for his own good.

I agree with the ring magazine .. around the 1991 mark they voted him the best heavyweight never to win the world title.. If you think about it that might be a great assesment.. later on (Ruddock ) could have had a shout at that place.. But Carl was a star.. very respected heavyweight..

[mr. magoo]

Superbly conditioned , great power, fabulous jab and brave as hell.. Maybee too brave and held that chin up there like a fucking lantern..

He had an OK chin but he wasn't elusive as he could have been..

He always got up and was stopped on his feet.. Too brave for his own good.

I agree with the ring magazine .. around the 1991 mark they voted him the best heavyweight never to win the world title.. If you think about it that might be a great assesment.. later on (Ruddock ) could have had a shout at that place.. But Carl was a star.. very respected heavyweight..

I purchased the Ring mag fairly regularly between say 1988-1993, and I don't recall anything about Williams being voted as the best guy to never win a title. i'm not saying that it didn't happen, I believe you. But frankly, I'm surprised that they didn't give that title to Quarry. Think about it. Williams best wins were decisions over a shot Tillis and aging Berbick. How does this size up to Quarry's wins over Patterson, Mathis, Foster, Shavers and Lyle-most of whom were at their best?

[JohnThomas1]

Oops, I forgot to include a tip-top Super Greg. :patsch


Put him in there ahead of Williams and Dokes and that'd be about right (argument for top 3 pure ability wise). :good

Much better, tho personally on talent alone i think he tops the lot. Unfortunately he'd sit last on your list for making use of it.

[Mendoza]

In terms of pure ability, and 'relative' overall potential where exactly would you rate a peak, inshape Carl Williams in comparison to the other lost generation HW's of the 80's? :think

Williams had a good overall skills, good size, good speed, and fine stamina. Williams looked the part, but he lacked toughness and durability when the going got rough. Williams was much better vs boxer than punchers.

I think Holmes, Tyson, Witherpsoon, Thomas, and Cooney were better. Chalk Carl Williams up as a solid top 4-7 type of contender who fell short in his most important fights.

[mr. magoo]

Williams had a good overall skills, good size, good speed, and fine stamina. Williams looked the part, but he lacked toughness and durability when the going got rough. Williams was much better vs boxer than punchers.

I think Holmes, Tyson, Witherpsoon, Thomas, and Cooney were better. Chalk Carl Williams up as a solid top 4-7 type of contender who fell short in his most important fights.

Williams and Witherspoon actually met in the ring around 1991. I can remember wanting to see the fight, but for whatever the reason, it was on the undercard of some pay per view card. From what I read, Spoon took a decision in what was not a particularly exciting fight. Soon after, Witherspoon was elevated to like #5 by the WBC, #7 by the WBA and like #8 by the IBF or something. He was cruising along and seemed like he was heading back to the top of the division, until he lost a horrible decision to Big foot Martin in 1992. Meanwhile, Carl Williams never really regained standing in the division. He fought a string of mediocrities resulting in a mixed bag of outcomes. At one point, I saw him lose a decision to Journeyman Jerry Jones on ESPN tuesday night fights. He was dropped either once or twice in that fight, and of course by left hooks. His last great moment, was when he rose off the canvas to drop Tommy Morrison twice before being pounded to submission in the later rounds. That fight basically put the cap on William's chances at ever being a contender again, and at the same time leaving a lot of doubt as to the quality of Tommy Morrison as a true force in the heavyweight division.

[Bigcat]

The thing i think was the clincher for Carl in that instance .. I think they looked at the championship fights each man took part in and looked at who came the closest.. Carl took a decent Larry Holmes to the wire not long before that article.. It may have swung it for him, Which championship fight did Jerry come as close to winning really.. I think that was the criteria they used for the vote..

[anut]

Yeah I agree with that, his chin was the main achillies heel. I'd definitely rank him above the likes of Tucker, maybe Tubbs and Dokes too. He was a more natural fighter and moved far better than the likes of a Bruno for example, had a very good jab and a good dose of skill. Reasonable power too. I don't think it's unreasonable to put him nearly up there with Witherspoon, Thomas and Weaver in terms of talent.

He had notable wins against Bert Cooper and Quick Tillis (one sided decision) and also performed very well in losing against Holmes. The manner of the Tyson defeat (legit stoppage or not?) probably took quite a good deal out of him, but nonetheless he performed pretty well against Witherspoon soon afterwards (despite both being faded fighters somewhat, certinaly Williams). My take:


1. Witherspoon
2. Thomas
3. Berbick
4. Weaver
5. Williams
6. Dokes

i put dokes ahead of weaver and berbick.

[Titan1]

Solid fighter, not in the skill league of a Page or Tubbs, but real close. Chin really hurt him, otherwise would've done better.

[Holmes' Jab]

i put dokes ahead of weaver and berbick.


Overall, or based on pure potential? I'd forgotten to put Greg Page on my initial list (as stated earlier) so he'd probably be fifth on that list knocking Dokes just off it, Tubbs would be after that. Ability-wise Page was amongst the top 3 of these fighters IMO.

[mr. magoo]

i put dokes ahead of weaver and berbick.

I don't know if Dokes' accomplishments really warrant his being rated above those guys. Sure, he got a win over Weaver, but that was one of the worst stoppages of all time, and the rematch resulted in a draw that many felt hercules had one. Additionally, Weaver had wins over Tate, Tillis, Coetzie, Williams, and Duplooy. Dokes had close decisions over Cobb, Rodriguez and an old Young. Not particularly impressive. Berbick was probably deserving of being rated above both men. Thorughout the course of his career, he defeated prime versions of Tate, Page, Thomas, Green, Bey, and canadian champion Racette. That's a decent list. When we consider that Pinklon Thomas was undefeated and viewed by some as the best heavyweight around in 1986, this was a huge win, likely better than any Dokes ever had.

[Lobotomy]

I don't know if Dokes' accomplishments really warrant his being rated above those guys. Sure, he got a win over Weaver, but that was one of the worst stoppages of all time, and the rematch resulted in a draw that many felt hercules had one. Additionally, Weaver had wins over Tate, Tillis, Coetzie, Williams, and Duplooy. Dokes had close decisions over Cobb, Rodriguez and an old Young. Not particularly impressive. Berbick was probably deserving of being rated above both men. Thorughout the course of his career, he defeated prime versions of Tate, Page, Thomas, Green, Bey, and canadian champion Racette. That's a decent list. When we consider that Pinklon Thomas was undefeated and viewed by some as the best heavyweight around in 1986, this was a huge win, likely better than any Dokes ever had.Very well put.

My take on Carl Williams is that he was an extraordinarily well coordinated athlete with limited durability and intelligence. He did appear to wilt a bit from the late round body attack Holmes subjected him to, and others have pointed out his deficient chin and vulnerability to the hook. His lack of a true killer instinct cost him dearly against Weaver, as he failed to distinguish between serious distress and what was possibly a ruse on Mike's part. (Hercules was clearly in nothing like the kind of trouble Bonecrusher immediately had him in the next time Weaver stepped in the ring.)

The Truth wasn't really an underachiever as I see it. Carl did very well considering his limitations. But if he had managed to upset Holmes, he would have been little more than a transitional champion. He was never a candidate for ATG status, even if his execution was completely mistake free. What he did was perfectly satisfactory, compared to all the others of his era who should have done so much more.