larry holmes proposed 50th fight unbeaten

[funso banjo baby]

legendary Larry talked a lot of crap in his time...but how serious was he when he claimed his 50th fight to beat Rocky's record was going to be against the tomato can Kip Kane ????

[HomicideHenry]

it was the 80's man, that's why Stallone was so big with ROCKY, at least the Ivan Drago's and Clubber Lang's were far more exciting than the Scott LeDoux's and Scott Frank's in real life.

[funso banjo baby]

but were Holmes's bums of the month worst than Ali's/louis's or pattersons ?

[Syntax Error]

but were Holmes's bums of the month worst than Ali's/louis's or pattersons ?

I don't think they were.

Holmes gets a lot of flack, but he could only fight who was around at the time & he did that.

[HomicideHenry]

Holmes' bum of the month I would say would be on par with Patterson's opponents Pete Rademacher, Roy Harris, Brian London, than Joe Louis' bum of the month.

Edit Note:

Same is always held against Marciano as well @ "Holmes gets alot of flack but he fought who was around", but I think it can be held more against Holmes than Marciano, only because the only men around left for The Rock was Bob Satterfield, Nino Valdes, Bob Baker, Tommy Jackson and Floyd Patterson who just moved up to Heavyweight. Who was he supposed to fight? Rematch against Moore, like he done with Charles and Walcott? fornicate that.

Holmes, on the other hand, had WBA champion Gerrie Coetzee, as well as Greg Page on his radar. Instead of Coetzee or Page he took on lesser opponents like Tex Cobb and Marvis Frazier. Now, had Marciano had a top flight opponent who could actually generate money, I am sure The Rock would have done it, but no one worth anything was around.

Earl Walls? Nah...nobody was around.

[Robinson]

Holmes held a fragment of the title and contray to Bert Sugars wonderful world of boxing and the general concensus he had to navigate political waters of complex BS ABC sanctioning fee's.

When Louis, Patterson, Marciano etc were champs they had the ONLY title.

Scott Frank was a bad challenger but is he any worse than a Rademacher ? or
some of Louis opponents/

Al McCoy was coming of losses before they faced Luis for the title. Or Abe Simon after his loss to
Lem Franklin? Who was Johnny Davis ? Seriously how is this guy better than Scott Frank ?

[funso banjo baby]

How long has some form of ratings system been in place ?

there certainly was in pattersons day....im assuming Rademacher was merely placed into the ratings ? was there an outcry?

i can understand the likes of teo stevenson...or (maybe even today) kandelan getting str8 shots in the pro ranks...but despite his amateur status pete was hardly a world star at the time.

[HomicideHenry]

Who was Johnny Davis ?

The Davis fight is one of those myths and legends in boxing, as a proposed "26th title defense" had occured, but the Davis fight wasn't a genuine title fight, it was just an exhibition that just happened to have judges and under NYSA commission ruling, which for whatever reason had the New York State title on the line that night...which infuriated Louis, who in turn took it out on poor Davis, who was blown away I believe some 30 seconds into the first round.

Thing about comparisons is this, would Scott Frank defeat Tony Galento? Would Marvis Frazier have defeated Buddy Baer? Would Scott LeDoux have defeated Arturo Gudoy? Would Tex Cobb have defeated Billy Conn? The answer is: fornicate no.

I rest my case.

[Robinson]

I think Marvis Frazier may have out pointed Buddy baer,

Ledoux vs Godoy who knows...havent seen enough of Godoy to figure that one out.

Galento would most likely maul Frank. But it would not have been one side to start with.
Like a street fight that turns quickly one sided.

Conn would have run all night behind a jab.

Would Tony Musto have beaten Earnie Shavers ?
Would Al McCoy have beaten Gerry Cooney ?
Would Jack Roper have beaten James Smith ?
Would Red Burman have beaten Trevor Berbick ?
Would Gus Dorazio have beaten Tim witherspoon ?
Would Jimmy Braddock have beaten Ken Norton ?

[Goodnight, Irene]

"I think Marvis Frazier may have out pointed Buddy baer..." - Robinson



Marvis couldn't fight the tide in the bath tub.

[Robinson]

His two losses were to Holmes and Tyson. Much stronger guys that blew him away or a power puncher like Tyson.
He out pointed Bonecrusher Smith..in a close fight.
Beat Tillis, Ribalta, older Bugner, Zouski and Broad. Not to mention his decent amateur background.

I really dont rate Buddy that highly. He was a big, awkward hard hitter. Would you say he is more talented than
A quick Tillish or James Smith ??

Baer lost to some mixed quality of fighters when he was in his better years. And because he did some what well against Louis in the first fight he is regarded so highly. And by well I mean he knocked Louis through the ropes...

Would you say that Marvis was better or worse than say ... Gunnar Barlund, Andre Lenglet, Ford Smith, Babe Hunt, or Eddie Blunt ? Other guys most around Marvis size that managed to beat the big Baer.

[Robinson]

He wouldnt need to fight the tide...just know how to swim.

[funso banjo baby]

...steve zouski ?



i dont think any of todays could have dented arturo godoy

[Robinson]

At the time of the Frazier fight Zouski was a pretty handy journeyman. Far from an all time great but still a decent notch in Frazier's belt in his short career.

Godoy I have only seen highlights of his Louis fights and a brief HL clip of him. So I am not a specialist on the man. BUT going from his ring career he does have a few L's against some guys who do not stand out as super fighters. Though I shall admit that he has been in with some top guys.


What makes you think that none of todays would get near the tough Chilean ?

[Robinson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMM5beVufN4
Here is a good HL clip of the hard nosed Chilean. Sadly I have not seen much more on him :(
my loss no doubt.

[Robinson]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3_AyftpP5M
Here is a first part of Tyson vs Zouski....this is 5 years after Frazier fought Steve.

If you ask me Zouski is a good win in 1981 when he was a credible guy for a 3-0 professional
rookie in Marvis. He could have taken on easier guys no doubt.

I am not saying that Zouski is a great or a top contender..what I am saying that for a 3-0 fighter
he is a good win in 1981.

Kym

[funso banjo baby]

no way

Zouski was another chapman/linberger type

look at his first 13 fights..... 4 fights with the same guy !!!! and a loss to the slow moving leroy boone

an awful record by the time he met Marvis

and every stage of his career zouski was a just fodder for up and coming or returning boxers....frazier/tyson/foreman/duplooy/tubbs....even scott frank !

Bruno had about 15 steve zouskis on his resume

[Robinson]

Tell me some about Godoy please.

What fights of his have you seen, that have you convinced that he would own all modern.


All I was saying in regards to Zouski that at 21-1 a win over him in your 4th pro fight is a good
win. Zouski was a regional tough guy no doubt, but still a good enough test for any young up
and comer. And he didnt look to bad against a 1986 Tyson either. Sure he got blown away,
but for a 'bum' he was ok in that one.

[raylawpc]

How long has some form of ratings system been in place ?

there certainly was in pattersons day....im assuming Rademacher was merely placed into the ratings ? was there an outcry?

i can understand the likes of teo stevenson...or (maybe even today) kandelan getting str8 shots in the pro ranks...but despite his amateur status pete was hardly a world star at the time.

The Ring magazine published the first ratings in the February 1925 edition, as annual ratings for 1924. The ratings were ghost written for Tex Rickard by Nat Fleischer. After Tex died, Jimmy Johnston then, if memory serves, Jack Dempsey lent their names to the ratings. I think for a while Tom McArdle, the MSG matchmaker, had something to do with them. In the early 30s, Fleischer took over but relied on some form of input from his staff and correspondents.

They were originally annual ratings, and Fleischer came up with the idea based on Walter Camp's All-Star College Football ratings.

[raylawpc]

Tell me some about Godoy please.

Godoy was one of the better "bums" faced by Louis. I would describe him as a fringe contender, but he gained a measure of fame by taking Louis 15 rounds in 1940. He revealed that Louis could struggle against fighters who employed a crouch. Louis TKOed him in the rematch, but didn't knock him out.

He was a tough fellow (only stopped twice in his career), and a pretty good hitter.

[Ambling Alp]

I think Marvis Frazier may have out pointed Buddy baer,

Ledoux vs Godoy who knows...havent seen enough of Godoy to figure that one out.

Galento would most likely maul Frank. But it would not have been one side to start with.
Like a street fight that turns quickly one sided.

Conn would have run all night behind a jab.

Would Tony Musto have beaten Earnie Shavers ?
Would Al McCoy have beaten Gerry Cooney ?
Would Jack Roper have beaten James Smith ?
Would Red Burman have beaten Trevor Berbick ?
Would Gus Dorazio have beaten Tim witherspoon ?
Would Jimmy Braddock have beaten Ken Norton ?

That's pretty much how I see it. Some of Holmes opponents weren't good at all, but so were many of Joe Louis's.
If you ranked Louis opponents in order of how good they were, do the same for Holmes and then match them man for man, I would say that Holmes challengers were slightly better.
And Holmes had to beat a better fighter to win the title. (Norton and Braddock.)

Overall, both were better at being "fighting champions" than almost any other heavyweight champion.

[dempseyfire]

I think Marvis Frazier may have out pointed Buddy baer,

Ledoux vs Godoy who knows...havent seen enough of Godoy to figure that one out.

Galento would most likely maul Frank. But it would not have been one side to start with.
Like a street fight that turns quickly one sided.

Conn would have run all night behind a jab.

Would Tony Musto have beaten Earnie Shavers ?
Would Al McCoy have beaten Gerry Cooney ?
Would Jack Roper have beaten James Smith ?
Would Red Burman have beaten Trevor Berbick ?
Would Gus Dorazio have beaten Tim witherspoon ?
Would Jimmy Braddock have beaten Ken Norton ?

What kind of comparison is that? You're comparing some of Louis's lesser challengers with the best Holmes fought . .

If you make it:

Max Schmeling v Tim Witherspoon
Lou Nova v Earnie Shavers
Buddy Baer v James Smith
Jersey Joe Walcott v Ken Norton
Tommy Farr v Trevor Berbick

You have a different picture.
Holmes fought some good fighters but I think Louis CLEARLY had the stronger overall competition. I'm not sure Scott Frank was even as good as a Johnny Paycheck ,and Paycheck was one of the few real 'bums' in the 'bum of the month' club.

Buddy Baer would've brutally knocked out Marvis Frazier early.

[Ambling Alp]

He was sort of playing devils advocate to what homicidehenry did in the post previous to his.
Earlier, Homocidehenry had earlier took Louis' best challengers and compared them to Holmes' worst challengers. So Robinson was flipping it around.

Of course, neither way proves very much. Yes Holmes best opponents were better than Louis' opponents, and Louis' best opponents were better than Holmes worst. So what.

Probably the fairest way would be to rank Louis' challengers in order of best to worst and then do the same for Holmes. Then compare them man for man. ie, Louis #1 challenger vs Holmes' #1 challenger, then #2 vs # 2 and so on. Of course, even this doesn't work perfectly because Louis had more opponents so you have to decide who you aren't going to count.

Walcott and Schmeling were better than any of Holmes title defenses. However, after that, Holmes had several opponents better than any of Louis title defenses.
At a minimum, Smith,Witherspoon,Cooney,Berbick,Shavers,and Weaver were clearly better than anyone else that Louis defended the title against.

[dempseyfire]

He was sort of playing devils advocate to what homicidehenry did in the post previous to his.
Earlier, Homocidehenry had earlier took Louis' best challengers and compared them to Holmes' worst challengers. So Robinson was flipping it around.

Of course, neither way proves very much. Yes Holmes best opponents were better than Louis' opponents, and Louis' best opponents were better than Holmes worst. So what.

Probably the fairest way would be to rank Louis' challengers in order of best to worst and then do the same for Holmes. Then compare them man for man. ie, Louis #1 challenger vs Holmes' #1 challenger, then #2 vs # 2 and so on. Of course, even this doesn't work perfectly because Louis had more opponents so you have to decide who you aren't going to count.

Walcott and Schmeling were better than any of Holmes title defenses. However, after that, Holmes had several opponents better than any of Louis title defenses.
At a minimum, Smith,Witherspoon,Cooney,Berbick,Shavers,and Weaver were clearly better than anyone else that Louis defended the title against.

Berbick . .Weaver . .Cooney . .Shavers . . Smith?? I think the likes of Nova, Pastor, Farr are clear favorites over them, and Galento, Baer, Mann, and Godoy are even money fights. Cooney and Weaver were big punchers but had very weak chins. Some of Louis's title challengers didn't produce the HL reel KOs of a Shavers or Cooney but they had two essential traits, stamina and durability, which would prove major obstacles to those opponents gaining the W. I would bet the house the likes of a Godoy would take all Shavers would throw and later knock him out. Sure, Buddy Baer wasn't a great boxer, but the guy had massive power and could take a hellacious amount of punishment before getting taken out . . .look at the first Louis fight . . .Cooney would've been out by the 2nd round in that fight.

[Robinson]

I think Marvis outpoints Buddy.

Thanks for the info on Godoy.