Did you consider Mike Dokes champion at any point?

[HomicideHenry]

As a side note, before going into prison, Dokes had a brief career as a wrestler. 'The Player' was his gimmick name. Evidentially it was something he been planning on doing before the Ruddock fight. Rumor has it he will make his return to rasslin' once he gets settled back home in Akron.

[Robinson]

Broughton

As much as you and the Gran man hate Holmes you have to
award him the credit of being consistent. Sure you can think
he got gift wins over Williams and Witherspoon, but in all of
those defences he was a consistent fighter.

- Look, as a pure fighter in the ring, there is much to admire about Holmes.

Don't know why some of you associate me with this granola fella, but the holes in Holmes record are big enough to drive a convoy of trucks through. The fact that a church has grown up around him and his sour grapes is aggravating as living next door to the church bells.

With gimmee type fights sprinkled liberally into an overall weak cast of defenses, it's much easier to be consistent than Young who was fed to wolves early and then yanked around and jobbed once he got good enough to really contend. At least they gave him Foreman.

I really can't get a handle on how Holmes/Young would go other than when they should've fought, Young was a legit contender and Holmes is holding back or being held back, which means advantage Young. Young would also clown Larry who was a deadly serious guy into foolishness.

As Ray mentions, after 78, Young loses his spark, his mojo and Larry is just entering the fray, so that's when Holmes has the advantage.

I don't like seeing the other champs/contenders disparaged when the facts are in the day, often more were watching them fight each other than they were watching Holmes against Lucien Rodriguez or Scott Frank, Zanon and so on.

Ok taking Holmes' championship contenders. What other champions, 'paper' or other wise do
you feel never faced questionable or 'weak' title challengers, those who had a decent reign.

Thank yOu

[HomicideHenry]

I will give the WBA champs this, even though they lost their titles usually in their maiden defenses, it was generally against THE top contender of the organization.

[Robinson]

And they gave us some exciting, un predictable fights in a really
under appreciated era/

[HomicideHenry]

IMO, the 1980's is superior to the era today. I never thought I'd ever see an era worse for heavyweights in my life time, but post Lewis is terrible. The out of shape bloated bastard who fought Vitali Klitschko in 2003 would have still reigned supreme over the HW's currently in action.

The 1980's, though, did have an amazing roster of talent, even if they were inconsistant for the most part: Tate, Coetzee, Weaver, Page, Tubbs, Dokes, Witherspoon, Smith, Bruno, Berbick, Thomas, Williams, Cooney, Bey, LeDoux, Frank, Evangelista, Spinks (Michael & Leon), Douglas, Tucker, Biggs, and of course Holmes and Tyson.

Excluding Holmes and Tyson, I'd pick the majority of the contenders of the 1980's to thrash the top men in today's division.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

IMO, the 1980's is superior to the era today. I never thought I'd ever see an era worse for heavyweights in my life time, but post Lewis is terrible. The out of shape bloated bastard who fought Vitali Klitschko in 2003 would have still reigned supreme over the HW's currently in action.

The 1980's, though, did have an amazing roster of talent, even if they were inconsistant for the most part: Tate, Coetzee, Weaver, Page, Tubbs, Dokes, Witherspoon, Smith, Bruno, Berbick, Thomas, Williams, Cooney, Bey, LeDoux, Frank, Evangelista, Spinks (Michael & Leon), Douglas, Tucker, Biggs, and of course Holmes and Tyson.

Excluding Holmes and Tyson, I'd pick the majority of the contenders of the 1980's to thrash the top men in today's division.

- Sure, if Lewis gets a cut of the millennium every bout.

Never heard of Ledoux, Bey, Frank, Evangelista, Leon, and Weaver described as talented before, but, hey, Joe Grimm's mum believed in him also.

How are your 80s heros gonna thrash everyone today when they could barely thrash a few of each other in the day? Ohhhhhhhhhh, I see, just fast forward, and BINGO, IBHOF pros the lot of them........ 8)

[Robinson]

IMO, the 1980's is superior to the era today. I never thought I'd ever see an era worse for heavyweights in my life time, but post Lewis is terrible. The out of shape bloated bastard who fought Vitali Klitschko in 2003 would have still reigned supreme over the HW's currently in action.

The 1980's, though, did have an amazing roster of talent, even if they were inconsistant for the most part: Tate, Coetzee, Weaver, Page, Tubbs, Dokes, Witherspoon, Smith, Bruno, Berbick, Thomas, Williams, Cooney, Bey, LeDoux, Frank, Evangelista, Spinks (Michael & Leon), Douglas, Tucker, Biggs, and of course Holmes and Tyson.

Excluding Holmes and Tyson, I'd pick the majority of the contenders of the 1980's to thrash the top men in today's division.

Yet in the 1980s many of the contemporary experts were boasting about how bad
the era was. Then in 1990s they said much the same. The 1980s by many of the
Bert Sugars about the place was a drought of talent until Tyson 'cleaned house'.
Its ashame that some historians and 'experts' are happy to sum a decade with a
caption.
I guess this is why to many the 1980s is really famous for the lighter weight
'Vegas boys'. To me however, and my DVD collection it offered hours of entertaining
fights, fun and diverse characters adn all too many 'could have, should have beens'.

[HomicideHenry]

Sure, if Lewis gets a cut of the millennium every bout.

Never heard of Ledoux, Bey, Frank, Evangelista, Leon, and Weaver described as talented before, but, hey, Joe Grimm's mum believed in him also.

How are your 80s heros gonna thrash everyone today when they could barely thrash a few of each other in the day? Ohhhhhhhhhh, I see, just fast forward, and BINGO, IBHOF pros the lot of them........ 8)

The top men were always fighting eachother. Where can you name another era where the top two or three were always fighting one another in the WBA, or in most of the organizations? Tate took on Coetzee, Coetzee took on Page, Page took on Tubbs, etc In a sense, the WBA titlists were taking harder fights on paper than what Holmes was, who was making just as many voluntary defenses as he was mandatories, else Holmes would have thrown his WBC belt into the trash rather than take on Marvis Frazier, when he should have been fighting Coetzee and Page.

Sure, its a given that Holmes was the true top man of the division, and that he would have beaten Page or Coetzee, but thats not the issue. The WBA title holders were always taking on the top ranked guys of the organization...the only man who managed to slip through the cracks, imo, was Bonecrusher Smith.

As far as talent is concerned, no LeDoux wasnt no world beater, but the man fought eight world champions and was a game, tough SOB every time out. You can make an argument for alot of them that though they weren't great, they made great fights. Leon was the former HW champion and Olympic gold medalist, Evangelista tried for the title before, Weaver is under-rated imo, Frank is often disregarded but he had a pedigree as an amateur and beat a few decent pros, and Bey gave Holmes a better fight than people would have figured, same as Berbick and Witherspoon gave Holmes tougher fights than expected.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Bey gave Holmes a better fight than people would have figured, same as Berbick and Witherspoon gave Holmes tougher fights than expected.

- Damn near all Larry's opponents save the obvious walkovers gave him problems which is why I can't accept him as Mr. Master Boxer.

And, no, most of the WBA champs weren't really fighting all of each other. Probably Spoon, Page, and Coetzee fought the most contenders/champs of the era until Tyson came along and cleaned out just about all.

It had potential to be the best, but Holmes refused to allow a rivalry series to develop with any of them. Larry set the precedent for that era champs to pretty much ignore each other until past their bests. Bowe of course ignores most all and lucked into Mr. Field having dosage problems.

[HomicideHenry]

Bowe of course ignores most all and lucked into Mr. Field having dosage problems.

=ignores this tripe=

[Collins2000]

Bowe of course ignores most all and lucked into Mr. Field having dosage problems.

=ignores this tripe=

That BRR wanker ought to find a site where haters like him can congregate sans pantalons and give each other reacharounds as they trash great fighters.

[Nile4000]

Happy 51st birthday, Michael.Hope you can get your life together at some point.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I hope someone checks the nature of the cake's, "icing" before he consumes it.

[yancey]

No.

All this multiple champion crap made me lose interest in boxing for quite a while.

[Nile4000]

I hope someone checks the nature of the cake's, "icing" before he consumes it.

Very good point, unfortunately.

[Robinson]

Dokes was a champ in a complicated era of sharing.

He never drew a line based on race. That means a lot
to me. It's not his fault he came along at a time when
their was more than one belt.

[The Great John L]

Dokes was a champ in a complicated era of sharing.

He never drew a line based on race. That means a lot
to me. It's not his fault he came along at a time when
their was more than one belt.

Yes, and he actually won the belt that was Ali's before Ali retired after the Spinks rematch. He beat Weaver who KO'd Tate who had won the tournament to find a replacement for Ali. Certainly a more legitimate HW claimant than most of the other claimants in the past 30 years.

[Robinson]

Agreed. Dokes was a champion. As much as
that era was criticised it had a lot more legitimacy
than the picture today.

[Nile4000]

He was a champ, but if he could've just won that title without the shadiness attached to it.

[Collins2000]

He was a champ, but if he could've just won that title without the shadiness attached to it.

Not Dokes' fault, though I think the rematch and the Coetzee debacle are more indicative of his true skill level.

[ghoster]

I didn't. I was upset with Joey Curtis. I was upset with how Don King made champions. I didn't even consider Dokes an alphabet titlest. Even after the bogus rematch. It was obvious King's heavyweight was going to be champion.(How many times did we see this?)

I know it wasn't Dokes fault but I didn't feel bad when Coetzee beat him.

[The Great John L]

He was a champ, but if he could've just won that title without the shadiness attached to it.

Not Dokes' fault, though I think the rematch and the Coetzee debacle are more indicative of his true skill level.

Perhaps, but I think the Coetzee fight was more indicative of his lack of focus and discipline. A friend of mine worked security for a number of parties held prior to that fight, and based on his observations, Dokes was far from focused on his opponent.

[ghoster]

I don't even think Dokes would have been a paper champion if it weren't for Don King. I feel bad for Weaver, like so many fighters of the era he could handle the opponent in the ring, just not the promoter at ringside.

- Hah, already they've forgotten that Larry was a King fighter with a paper title.

From 79 to 83 Dokes fought Jimmy Young whom Holmes avoided, Lucien Rodriguez before Larry ever graced him with a title shot, then back to back Ocasio, Tex Cobb before Holmes ever graced Tex with a title shot, and back to back Weaver in addition to 7 other good journeymen types, giving Dokes a record of 12-0-2, avenging both draws, and 4-0-2 against Holmes' title comp.

Funny how Holmes record is papered over and then whitewashed, but Dokes given black marks for being a young dynamic fighter beating era contenders Larry didn't want to fight. Dokes penalized for losing his title to new champ, Coetzee, whom Larry also refused to fight.

Well, so it goes in bizzaro world.

Funny, I don't understand how Holmes avoided Young. After the Norton fight Jimmy Young got beat by Ossie Ocasio twice. Are you suggesting Holmes should hve fought Young rather than the fighter that just beat him twice? And Holmes wanted Coetzee bad, as he even tried to promote a match himself. You see the reason the titles stayed split during that era as it has in most eras, is because profitability. The promoter made more money with 2-3 champions in the same weight class than with one. Of course that changed when a ticket seller like Tyson came on the scene.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Funny, I don't understand how Holmes avoided Young. After the Norton fight Jimmy Young got beat by Ossie Ocasio twice. Are you suggesting Holmes should hve fought Young rather than the fighter that just beat him twice? And Holmes wanted Coetzee bad, as he even tried to promote a match himself. You see the reason the titles stayed split during that era as it has in most eras, is because profitability. The promoter made more money with 2-3 champions in the same weight class than with one. Of course that changed when a ticket seller like Tyson came on the scene.

- Not funny my friend, just pitiful that you can't see that Young was done as an elite contender by the time of Ocasio, completely removed from any title shot. Beating Ocasio meant squat to his career. He was just picking up paychecks at that point in time.

Young is only one year older than Larry and part of the golden era of Ali/Frazier/Norton/Foreman. Young fought Roy Williams, Shavers 2x, Dunn, Lyle 2x, and Ali all before either Ali or Holmes ever danced with them. It was Young beating Foreman who's the same age as Larry in PR, and who was Larry fighting on the same card? Why he was padding out his record with the GREAT Horace Robinson, that's who.

Larry never fought a ranked contender until Shavers in 78, Larry's 6th year as a pro, the only golden era name on his record.

Don't give me that Larry wanted Coetzee baloney. Too much video talking about that fight. Larry was an ABC champ, plain and simple, never holding more than 33-50% of the belts never in a single unification bout and you can't spin it with ticket seller baloney. More than a dozen 80s era big names Larry didn't face while padding his record with Ocasio, Zanon, and most of the rest of his soft touches.

[Robinson]

Norton beats Young.
Holmes beats Shavers.
Holmes beats Norton...

Young 'fades' away.

When should Holmes have faced Young ?
In 1976-77 ? What good would have that done
for Young, considering he was the name at the
time. He had his wins over Foreman and Lyle and his
close run with Ali in this time. Besides some safe fights
against journeymen...when and why would he have
fought Holmes?

Why would Young's people have wanted to fight Holmes,
I personally think Holmes would have benefited fighting
Young. How could he not ?

Occasio beat Young, and eliminated him...it gets no more
simpler than that