larry holmes

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 03 Oct 2005, 22:17

to say they would dominate marciano easily is disrespectful and ludicrous. holmes would have trouble with marcianos style. not to mention holmes had a lot of problems with a lot lesser fighters than marciano. as for liston, how would he fare late in the fight? how is he gonna handle himself whne the going gets tough? will he be able to take marcianos punches, pressure and aggresion???

u can make a good case for both fighters beating marciano, but to say they beat an all time great heavyweight easy is pushing it.

theone · Post by **theone** » 03 Oct 2005, 22:38

u can make a good case for both fighters beating marciano, but to say they beat an all time great heavyweight easy is pushing it.

Frazier is an all-time great and Foreman beat him easily. Foreman and Liston are all time greats and Ali beat them easy. Duran is an all time great, Hearns beat him easy Michael spinks is an all time great Tyson beat him easy.
Am I being disrespectful to these great fighters by pointing this out?
Is it really ludicrus to suggest an all time great can be easily bested by another all time great, though it happened many times before? How is this pushing it?
And how exactly would Marciano's style be diffuclt for Holmes? The rock would have to invest way too much trying to get inside one of the greatest jabs ever, especially with the boxing skills and movement Larry had. The Rock face, battered and cut by lghheavyweights and small heavyweights, would be ripped shreds by Holmes slashing punches. Charles and Holmes were not the heavyweights Holmes was, not even close, and they gave the Rock almost more than he could handle.

as for liston, how would he fare late in the fight? how is he gonna handle himself whne the going gets tough? will he be able to take marcianos punches, pressure and aggresion???

The fight woulnt last that long. Too much power, reach, strenght and superior boxing skills, the Rock is a stopped on cuts in eight.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 04 Oct 2005, 03:26

rocky had a swarmer slugger style. that would give holmes trouble any day of the week. rocky would always give boxers like holmes problems.

and dont go saying rocky had trouble with a master boxer in charles, because i could say holmes had a lot of trouble with weaver, snipes, norton, etc. so if u want to play like that i can spin it around easily.
ALSO KEEP THIS IN MIND. HOLMES IS 6'4 AND ROCKY LIKES TO GET REALLY LOW, IT WILL BE HARDER AND MORE ACKWARD FOR HOLMES TO BEND DOWN AND TRY TO LAND THE JAB. IT WILL DECREASE THE POWER OF THE JAB, AND THE MOMENTUM.

and u keep saying small heavyweights. walcott was 6' 197lb but he was chizziled, all muscle. holmes in his prime was only 208lbs. thats not much heavier.

as for liston, thats absurd u would think he would stop rocky on cuts. rocky was never stopped on cuts in his entire career!!!!!!

- both liston and marciano are great fighters who would win in any era.

IMO Marciano was the superior fighter. marciano was plenty use to fighting guys with longer reaches. You don't want to underestimate a guy who's got pulverising power, superior fitness and doesn't think he can ever be beat.

Liston was a bully largely by reputation, but, in the ring, Marciano was truly mean to the bone.
You'd have to kill Marciano before he quit. As Ali demonstrated, Liston just had to be flustered.

- marty marshall wieghed 180lbs yet broke listons jaw and beat him

The interesting thing about Marciano's style is that although he could be hit a fare bit (due to his low hands an inability to block well/parry a shot) he was GREAT at closing the distance. He is able to constantly get close to Walcott, Charles and Moore in their fights. He would march forward crouching low, using some head movement and time his shots-people forget this. Due to his SHORT reach he was very hard to tie up because he kept his arms covering his body and in close and then worked on the inside once he got inside then opponents guard.

Marciano was a crude fighter that did some clever things-the latter is often forgotten-or just not recognized.

He could get underneath Liston's jab and then work his magic up close.

I don't really know what would happen in this fight. I don't doubt Rocky's ability to take a punch of a big puncher over 200lbs but Liston mix's the power with the skill and the range. He could very well stop the Rock during the fight.

Marciano's Pressure and power would be able to very much trouble Liston though. I believe the Rock had more heart and I would fancy to take over if the fight went past the half-way stage.

On a pick I chose Marciano because of his great intangible’s, work rate and ruthlessness. He would not give Liston a rest and would not stop hunting him at a 100mph unless he was stopped. with that in mind I would fancy Marciano in about 9-10 rounds of a brutal encounter, but i wouldnt be suprised if liston wins by mid round stoppage 5-8 rounds.

What I have said is a result of what I know of each fighter though. It does not change the possibility that Marciano may very well of been tailor made for Liston.

remember liston was a powerful slugger, and those usually match up well against swarmer types. liston was a boxer puncher with better ring technician skills than foreman.

In addition, Liston had a freakish 84” reach and 15” fists. and listons massive uppercuts would be trouble for Marciano.

VERY HARD MATCHUP TO CHOOSE BY

and i will say this

Marciano was not Patterson, Williams, or zora folley. He was far more durable than those guys!

On the other hand, Liston was not Charles or Walcott. Liston is not likely to be taken out by one punch.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 04 Oct 2005, 07:01

Now don't be downplayin Patterson, That's my job your stealin my thunder.

Grimm · Post by **Grimm** » 04 Oct 2005, 07:27

I think Marciano would be ripped to hell by Holmes but, would have a 50/50 chance of KO'ing Liston or being Ko'd.

theone · Post by **theone** » 04 Oct 2005, 08:45

ALSO KEEP THIS IN MIND. HOLMES IS 6'4 AND ROCKY LIKES TO GET REALLY LOW, IT WILL BE HARDER AND MORE ACKWARD FOR HOLMES TO BEND DOWN AND TRY TO LAND THE JAB. IT WILL DECREASE THE POWER OF THE JAB, AND THE MOMENTUM.

Actually this would work in holmes favor. Marciano is the agressior and his low crouch would make it difficult to catch someone who moved around and could fight going backwards like Holmes. Rocky knocked out most of his opponents with short compact punches to the head. Punching up actually decreases power more so than punching down.

- marty marshall wieghed 180lbs yet broke listons jaw and beat him

Marshell was a top ten contender and was much more experienced. He caught liston with a great punch while Liston was laughing at him and had his mouth open.
It was only listons 8th fight, and though his jaw was broken in the first round he finished the fight on his feet.
In contrast, Marciano didnt meet his top ten opponent until his 25th fight.

nd u keep saying small heavyweights. walcott was 6' 197lb but he was chizziled, all muscle. holmes in his prime was only 208lbs. thats not much heavier.
Holmes was a little heavier than 208 in his prime, more like 213lbs. But his reach was three inches taller and had around an eight inch reach advantage on Walcott. Not to mention that walcott was an old man when he fought Marciano. He didnt suddenly reach his peak at an advanced age, the division just got that much weaker in those years.

as for liston, thats absurd u would think he would stop rocky on cuts. rocky was never stopped on cuts in his entire career!!!!

He never fought a monster like Liston before. Ezzard Charles almost stopped the Rock in their second fight. The Rock was given one more round to stop Charles, because his nose was split in half. Liston was a much deadlier fighter than Charles, especially in that stage of Charles's career.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 04 Oct 2005, 12:59

theone wrote

Not to mention that walcott was an old man when he fought Marciano. He didnt suddenly reach his peak at an advanced age, the division just got that much weaker in those years.

walcott was old but not OLD. walcott was stilll in his prime. ask any historian and most would agree. a guy i know recently interviewed gil clancy and he asked if walcott was in his prime and he replied "he certainly was at his best." i could give u many more quotes but no need. fact is walcott had just knocked out and beat ezzard charles twice!!!! walcott was cming off the best wins of his career. some peoples prime is late like bernard hopkins, and lennox lewis.
and if u watch the marciano-walcott I fight, u would realize that walcott fought one of his best fights. its a shame people fail to realize walcott reached his prime in his thirties. they look at his age and simply think he was past his prime, but they forget the fact walcott recorded his best wins in his late thirties.

theone wrote

He never fought a monster like Liston before. Ezzard Charles almost stopped the Rock in their second fight. The Rock was given one more round to stop Charles, because his nose was split in half. Liston was a much deadlier fighter than Charles, especially in that stage of Charles's career.

its a myth that fight would go on only one more round. the doctor in fact wasnt that closed to stopping the fight. and in modern day rules, rocky would win a technical decision cause of an accidental elbow. rocky dominated the 2nd fight from start to finish besides the cut.

and im nowhere near comparing vingo to holmes abililty. im simply comparing there heights. u say rocky would have trouble hitting 6'4 holmes , but let me tell u marciano sent 6'4 carmine vingo into a coma, so it shows u he can hit a 6'4 mans chin with power

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 04 Oct 2005, 13:17

but lets stick to the subject.

hey i got a question about holmes.

silkov, how come holmes never fought greg page??? it seemed like greg page called holmes out and alays said holmes was ducking him.

Cojimar 1945 · Post by **Cojimar 1945** » 04 Oct 2005, 15:52

I think Greg Page may not have fought Holmes because he lost to David Bey who then went on to lose to Holmes.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 04 Oct 2005, 16:00

Cojimar 1945 wrote:I think Greg Page may not have fought Holmes because he lost to David Bey who then went on to lose to Holmes.

Yeah, and he lost to Witherspoon prior to Bey. This all happened during a time that he was putting his career back together after losing to Berbick less than 2 years earlier.

I don't think Holmes ducked Page. Of course, there were a few top ranked HW's around during his career that Marciano didn't fight as well. I think you can safely say this about any HW champ who held the belt for more than a few years.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 04 Oct 2005, 16:15

Of course, there were a few top ranked HW's around during his career that Marciano didn't fight as well. I

like who??? valdez was gonna fight rocky, but he lost to moore so moore got the shot instead.

yeah i dont see why peopl say holmes ducked page

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 04 Oct 2005, 17:52

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
Of course, there were a few top ranked HW's around during his career that Marciano didn't fight as well. I
like who??? valdez was gonna fight rocky, but he lost to moore so moore got the shot instead.

yeah i dont see why peopl say holmes ducked page

Yes, I think you're right. There weren't very many good HW's during the Marciano reign. Beyond Charles, Walcott and Moore, it was a pretty weak lot.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 04 Oct 2005, 18:13

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:but lets stick to the subject.

hey i got a question about holmes.

silkov, how come holmes never fought greg page??? it seemed like greg page called holmes out and alays said holmes was ducking him.

Page perhaps would have fought Holmes but he lost key fights which stopped this happening. Page lost to Berbick, Bey and Witherspoon... all of whom were beaten by Holmes.

Nile4000 · Post by **Nile4000** » 04 Oct 2005, 18:59

The chance Holmes had to fight Page, it was he, not Page, who backed out.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 04 Oct 2005, 19:04

Nile4000 wrote:The chance Holmes had to fight Page, it was he, not Page, who backed out.

Holmes didn't back out... Page lost to Bey and so Holmes fought Bey instead!...

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 04 Oct 2005, 20:56

i do have one question, why did holmes fight guys like lorenzo zanon, scott le deux, marvis frasier, scott frank, leroy jones, lucien rodriguez, and even mike weaver(who was a journeyman, no one knew how good he really was). perhaps instead of one of those soft defenses, he could have taken on a pinklon thomas, greg page, or mike dokes???

i would rather seen holmes have 8 defenses against the top contenders than 20 defenses against some softies.

- and holmes did fight some champions and top contenders, but he did unessecarily fight a couple softies.

i would say the same goes for joe louis, who should have fought bivins(in 42), fox, and ray. but louis was inactive for 4 years, and during those 4 years, he would have most likely fought those guys and had about 40 title defenses.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Oct 2005, 06:08

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i do have one question, why did holmes fight guys like lorenzo zanon, scott le deux, marvis frasier, scott frank, leroy jones, lucien rodriguez, and even mike weaver(who was a journeyman, no one knew how good he really was). perhaps instead of one of those soft defenses, he could have taken on a pinklon thomas, greg page, or mike dokes???

i would rather seen holmes have 8 defenses against the top contenders than 20 defenses against some softies.

- and holmes did fight some champions and top contenders, but he did unessecarily fight a couple softies.

i would say the same goes for joe louis, who should have fought bivins(in 42), fox, and ray. but louis was inactive for 4 years, and during those 4 years, he would have most likely fought those guys and had about 40 title defenses.

Zanaon and Rodriguez were Europeon champs... Louis fought his share of Europeon fighters of that ilk... so did Ali.
Ledoux was a tough guy who had decent fights with a number of contenders... again, the likes of Ali and Louis fought fighters of Ledouxes level.
Leroy Jones was undefeated I belive when he fought Holmes and was actually considered a good challenge.
Wever was a very good fighter and very dangerous and Holmes beat him despite having flu at the time of the fight.
As for Holmes not fighting Dokes, Page or Thomas... as I said earlier Page lost key fights which stopped him fighting Holmes, he lost to Berbick, Witherspoon and Bey... all of whom Holmes fought and beat.
After Bey beat Page for the NABF Title he fought Holmes in his next fight.
As for Thomas, he lost to Berbick who had already fought and been beaten by Holmes.
I think Holmes competition stands very well with that of Ali and Louis... both Ali and Louis fought there share of 'soft touches' Holmes comteition is imo second only to Ali's. Holmes fought everyone... even those he didn't fight he fought and beat people who beat them...

You should also remember that some of Holmes opponents looked 'bad' against him simply because he was so good....

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 05 Oct 2005, 06:39

silkov wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i do have one question, why did holmes fight guys like lorenzo zanon, scott le deux, marvis frasier, scott frank, leroy jones, lucien rodriguez, and even mike weaver(who was a journeyman, no one knew how good he really was). perhaps instead of one of those soft defenses, he could have taken on a pinklon thomas, greg page, or mike dokes???

i would rather seen holmes have 8 defenses against the top contenders than 20 defenses against some softies.

- and holmes did fight some champions and top contenders, but he did unessecarily fight a couple softies.

i would say the same goes for joe louis, who should have fought bivins(in 42), fox, and ray. but louis was inactive for 4 years, and during those 4 years, he would have most likely fought those guys and had about 40 title defenses.

Zanaon and Rodriguez were Europeon champs... Louis fought his share of Europeon fighters of that ilk... so did Ali.
Ledoux was a tough guy who had decent fights with a number of contenders... again, the likes of Ali and Louis fought fighters of Ledouxes level.
Leroy Jones was undefeated I belive when he fought Holmes and was actually considered a good challenge.
Wever was a very good fighter and very dangerous and Holmes beat him despite having flu at the time of the fight.
As for Holmes not fighting Dokes, Page or Thomas... as I said earlier Page lost key fights which stopped him fighting Holmes, he lost to Berbick, Witherspoon and Bey... all of whom Holmes fought and beat.
After Bey beat Page for the NABF Title he fought Holmes in his next fight.
As for Thomas, he lost to Berbick who had already fought and been beaten by Holmes.
I think Holmes competition stands very well with that of Ali and Louis... both Ali and Louis fought there share of 'soft touches' Holmes comteition is imo second only to Ali's. Holmes fought everyone... even those he didn't fight he fought and beat people who beat them...

You should also remember that some of Holmes opponents looked 'bad' against him simply because he was so good....

In the 1980s so much of the boxing press were lamenting the poor state of the division. Almost all of the Heavies were overweight and very few of them looked athletic. Are you saying that the era was actually very good, Silkov? Maybe everyone had been spoilt in the 1970s.

Whoever the likes of Bey, Tubbs and Page beat they almost never looked in good condition.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Oct 2005, 09:01

Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i do have one question, why did holmes fight guys like lorenzo zanon, scott le deux, marvis frasier, scott frank, leroy jones, lucien rodriguez, and even mike weaver(who was a journeyman, no one knew how good he really was). perhaps instead of one of those soft defenses, he could have taken on a pinklon thomas, greg page, or mike dokes???

i would rather seen holmes have 8 defenses against the top contenders than 20 defenses against some softies.

- and holmes did fight some champions and top contenders, but he did unessecarily fight a couple softies.

i would say the same goes for joe louis, who should have fought bivins(in 42), fox, and ray. but louis was inactive for 4 years, and during those 4 years, he would have most likely fought those guys and had about 40 title defenses.

Zanaon and Rodriguez were Europeon champs... Louis fought his share of Europeon fighters of that ilk... so did Ali.
Ledoux was a tough guy who had decent fights with a number of contenders... again, the likes of Ali and Louis fought fighters of Ledouxes level.
Leroy Jones was undefeated I belive when he fought Holmes and was actually considered a good challenge.
Wever was a very good fighter and very dangerous and Holmes beat him despite having flu at the time of the fight.
As for Holmes not fighting Dokes, Page or Thomas... as I said earlier Page lost key fights which stopped him fighting Holmes, he lost to Berbick, Witherspoon and Bey... all of whom Holmes fought and beat.
After Bey beat Page for the NABF Title he fought Holmes in his next fight.
As for Thomas, he lost to Berbick who had already fought and been beaten by Holmes.
I think Holmes competition stands very well with that of Ali and Louis... both Ali and Louis fought there share of 'soft touches' Holmes comteition is imo second only to Ali's. Holmes fought everyone... even those he didn't fight he fought and beat people who beat them...

You should also remember that some of Holmes opponents looked 'bad' against him simply because he was so good....
In the 1980s so much of the boxing press were lamenting the poor state of the division. Almost all of the Heavies were overweight and very few of them looked athletic. Are you saying that the era was actually very good, Silkov? Maybe everyone had been spoilt in the 1970s.

Whoever the likes of Bey, Tubbs and Page beat they almost never looked in good condition.

But they were good fighters... if you watch the fights of Bey and Page and indeed Tubbs they put to shame the heavies of the 90s and now. The truth is that the heavies of Holmes era were very talented its just that they got a bad press because of the era they followed. Page was a bit fleshy but he was also a very loose, fast moving heavy with a decent punch... had he been laden with muscle he would not have been half as fast as he was. Page actually fought better when he was around 238... when he trimmed down he found himself outmuscled by Berbick.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 05 Oct 2005, 09:15

silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
Zanaon and Rodriguez were Europeon champs... Louis fought his share of Europeon fighters of that ilk... so did Ali.
Ledoux was a tough guy who had decent fights with a number of contenders... again, the likes of Ali and Louis fought fighters of Ledouxes level.
Leroy Jones was undefeated I belive when he fought Holmes and was actually considered a good challenge.
Wever was a very good fighter and very dangerous and Holmes beat him despite having flu at the time of the fight.
As for Holmes not fighting Dokes, Page or Thomas... as I said earlier Page lost key fights which stopped him fighting Holmes, he lost to Berbick, Witherspoon and Bey... all of whom Holmes fought and beat.
After Bey beat Page for the NABF Title he fought Holmes in his next fight.
As for Thomas, he lost to Berbick who had already fought and been beaten by Holmes.
I think Holmes competition stands very well with that of Ali and Louis... both Ali and Louis fought there share of 'soft touches' Holmes comteition is imo second only to Ali's. Holmes fought everyone... even those he didn't fight he fought and beat people who beat them...

You should also remember that some of Holmes opponents looked 'bad' against him simply because he was so good....
In the 1980s so much of the boxing press were lamenting the poor state of the division. Almost all of the Heavies were overweight and very few of them looked athletic. Are you saying that the era was actually very good, Silkov? Maybe everyone had been spoilt in the 1970s.

Whoever the likes of Bey, Tubbs and Page beat they almost never looked in good condition.

But they were good fighters... if you watch the fights of Bey and Page and indeed Tubbs they put to shame the heavies of the 90s and now. The truth is that the heavies of Holmes era were very talented its just that they got a bad press because of the era they followed. Page was a bit fleshy but he was also a very loose, fast moving heavy with a decent punch... had he been laden with muscle he would not have been half as fast as he was. Page actually fought better when he was around 238... when he trimmed down he found himself outmuscled by Berbick.

I agree that physique is not everything (look at Bruno-Witherspoon) and skill is the most important factor but Bey and Tubbs were fat men. They were professional sportsmen but looked like slobs. At the end of the 1970s Ali was jiggly and fought in quite a languid style. Looking back he may well have influenced that era's fighters.

I think that the 80s had a lot of good heavies but the 90's had more potential greats with Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield and Tyson. These guys all had one another to fight to achieve their greatness but I feel that Bowe spoiled what could have been a great era by only fighting Holyfield.

Looking back though from Sullivan though, a lot of champions have impressive records before they become champ Johnson, Dempsey, Liston...

Louis both cleaned up the division before winning the title and held on to it for so long that he managed to achieve both.

Ali, Marciano and Holmes all looked so much better one they won their titles.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Oct 2005, 09:37

Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote: In the 1980s so much of the boxing press were lamenting the poor state of the division. Almost all of the Heavies were overweight and very few of them looked athletic. Are you saying that the era was actually very good, Silkov? Maybe everyone had been spoilt in the 1970s.

Whoever the likes of Bey, Tubbs and Page beat they almost never looked in good condition.

But they were good fighters... if you watch the fights of Bey and Page and indeed Tubbs they put to shame the heavies of the 90s and now. The truth is that the heavies of Holmes era were very talented its just that they got a bad press because of the era they followed. Page was a bit fleshy but he was also a very loose, fast moving heavy with a decent punch... had he been laden with muscle he would not have been half as fast as he was. Page actually fought better when he was around 238... when he trimmed down he found himself outmuscled by Berbick.
I agree that physique is not everything (look at Bruno-Witherspoon) and skill is the most important factor but Bey and Tubbs were fat men. They were professional sportsmen but looked like slobs. At the end of the 1970s Ali was jiggly and fought in quite a languid style. Looking back he may well have influenced that era's fighters.

I think that the 80s had a lot of good heavies but the 90's had more potential greats with Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield and Tyson. These guys all had one another to fight to achieve their greatness but I feel that Bowe spoiled what could have been a great era by only fighting Holyfield.

Looking back though from Sullivan though, a lot of champions have impressive records before they become champ Johnson, Dempsey, Liston...

Louis both cleaned up the division before winning the title and held on to it for so long that he managed to achieve both.

Ali, Marciano and Holmes all looked so much better one they won their titles.

I think Thomas, Page, Witherspoon, Dokes were all better than Lewis, Holifield and Bowe... the Heavies of the 90s were very poor... outside of Lewis, Bowe, Holifield and Tyson who was there?. In the 80s there was far more talent I think.
Louis impressed with his run up to the title but he was helped by the fact that there was so many former world champions still active because of the high turnover of champs in the early to mid-30s and also most of those fighters were over the hill.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 05 Oct 2005, 10:10

silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
But they were good fighters... if you watch the fights of Bey and Page and indeed Tubbs they put to shame the heavies of the 90s and now. The truth is that the heavies of Holmes era were very talented its just that they got a bad press because of the era they followed. Page was a bit fleshy but he was also a very loose, fast moving heavy with a decent punch... had he been laden with muscle he would not have been half as fast as he was. Page actually fought better when he was around 238... when he trimmed down he found himself outmuscled by Berbick.
I agree that physique is not everything (look at Bruno-Witherspoon) and skill is the most important factor but Bey and Tubbs were fat men. They were professional sportsmen but looked like slobs. At the end of the 1970s Ali was jiggly and fought in quite a languid style. Looking back he may well have influenced that era's fighters.

I think that the 80s had a lot of good heavies but the 90's had more potential greats with Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield and Tyson. These guys all had one another to fight to achieve their greatness but I feel that Bowe spoiled what could have been a great era by only fighting Holyfield.

Looking back though from Sullivan though, a lot of champions have impressive records before they become champ Johnson, Dempsey, Liston...

Louis both cleaned up the division before winning the title and held on to it for so long that he managed to achieve both.

Ali, Marciano and Holmes all looked so much better one they won their titles.

I think Thomas, Page, Witherspoon, Dokes were all better than Lewis, Holifield and Bowe... the Heavies of the 90s were very poor... outside of Lewis, Bowe, Holifield and Tyson who was there?. In the 80s there was far more talent I think.
Louis impressed with his run up to the title but he was helped by the fact that there was so many former world champions still active because of the high turnover of champs in the early to mid-30s and also most of those fighters were over the hill.

I agree that there were more good fighters in the 80s but I think Lewis and Holyfield were a cut above the ones you mentioned. If nothing else they were more professional (if you forget Lewis-Rahman I) and more focused.

Joe did beat all those ex champs and many of them were over the hill but he still cleaned out the division.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 05 Oct 2005, 10:46

Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote: I agree that physique is not everything (look at Bruno-Witherspoon) and skill is the most important factor but Bey and Tubbs were fat men. They were professional sportsmen but looked like slobs. At the end of the 1970s Ali was jiggly and fought in quite a languid style. Looking back he may well have influenced that era's fighters.

I think that the 80s had a lot of good heavies but the 90's had more potential greats with Lewis, Bowe, Holyfield and Tyson. These guys all had one another to fight to achieve their greatness but I feel that Bowe spoiled what could have been a great era by only fighting Holyfield.

Looking back though from Sullivan though, a lot of champions have impressive records before they become champ Johnson, Dempsey, Liston...

Louis both cleaned up the division before winning the title and held on to it for so long that he managed to achieve both.

Ali, Marciano and Holmes all looked so much better one they won their titles.

I think Thomas, Page, Witherspoon, Dokes were all better than Lewis, Holifield and Bowe... the Heavies of the 90s were very poor... outside of Lewis, Bowe, Holifield and Tyson who was there?. In the 80s there was far more talent I think.
Louis impressed with his run up to the title but he was helped by the fact that there was so many former world champions still active because of the high turnover of champs in the early to mid-30s and also most of those fighters were over the hill.
I agree that there were more good fighters in the 80s but I think Lewis and Holyfield were a cut above the ones you mentioned. If nothing else they were more professional (if you forget Lewis-Rahman I) and more focused.

Joe did beat all those ex champs and many of them were over the hill but he still cleaned out the division.

But Lewis was koed twice by fairly mediocre fighters... he was good but nowhere near great... I wouldn't put him above Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes etc...
I love Holifield but he struggled with both Holmes and Foreman in their 40s... which put him into context.... he was never a natural Heavy.
Bowe was probably the most talented of the 90s heavies and could have been great but ate himself out of his career.
Over the past couple of years I've collected together all I can of the heavyweight fights of the early 80s... fights like Weaver vs Coetzee, Berbick vs Page etc and I've been very surprised abd impressed with the quality of these guys and the fights they had. Page definately got a very raw deal from the press in the 80s... he was far from the boring fighter he was portrayed as and his fights with Tillis, Berbick, Snipes, Coetzee etc are all excellent. I think the media of the time was so spoilt basically after the Ali era that they saw Holmes and the fighters of his era in a much more negative light than they shouldve.
Regarding Lewis again, I feel a peak Holifield would have beaten him both Holifieid and Tyson were well past their best when Lewis fought them.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 05 Oct 2005, 11:11

silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
I think Thomas, Page, Witherspoon, Dokes were all better than Lewis, Holifield and Bowe... the Heavies of the 90s were very poor... outside of Lewis, Bowe, Holifield and Tyson who was there?. In the 80s there was far more talent I think.
Louis impressed with his run up to the title but he was helped by the fact that there was so many former world champions still active because of the high turnover of champs in the early to mid-30s and also most of those fighters were over the hill.
I agree that there were more good fighters in the 80s but I think Lewis and Holyfield were a cut above the ones you mentioned. If nothing else they were more professional (if you forget Lewis-Rahman I) and more focused.

Joe did beat all those ex champs and many of them were over the hill but he still cleaned out the division.
But Lewis was koed twice by fairly mediocre fighters... he was good but nowhere near great... I wouldn't put him above Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes etc...
I love Holifield but he struggled with both Holmes and Foreman in their 40s... which put him into context.... he was never a natural Heavy.
Bowe was probably the most talented of the 90s heavies and could have been great but ate himself out of his career.
Over the past couple of years I've collected together all I can of the heavyweight fights of the early 80s... fights like Weaver vs Coetzee, Berbick vs Page etc and I've been very surprised abd impressed with the quality of these guys and the fights they had. Page definately got a very raw deal from the press in the 80s... he was far from the boring fighter he was portrayed as and his fights with Tillis, Berbick, Snipes, Coetzee etc are all excellent. I think the media of the time was so spoilt basically after the Ali era that they saw Holmes and the fighters of his era in a much more negative light than they shouldve.
Regarding Lewis again, I feel a peak Holifield would have beaten him both Holifieid and Tyson were well past their best when Lewis fought them.

Holyfield could look bad, especially earlier in his HW career but he did seem to gain authority as the years went on. I think he'd have beaten Lewis (some poeple think he should have got the decision in the rematch) in his prime too.

I think Lewis would beat all the fighters you mention except for maybe Witherspoon (though I'd still pick Lewis). None of them fought at a great pace and Lewis had a much harder shot than any of them. I do think they'd be very competitive fights though. He did fight Holy and Tyson ate in their careers but I think he beats Tyson whenever they fought.

It's interesting looking back. Do the guys in the press always over criticise the contemporary fighters? Maybe they didn't know how well off they were. I think Page was considered a real talent and he really disappointed.

Nile4000 · Post by **Nile4000** » 05 Oct 2005, 16:36

silkov wrote:
Nile4000 wrote:The chance Holmes had to fight Page, it was he, not Page, who backed out.

Holmes didn't back out... Page lost to Bey and so Holmes fought Bey instead!...

Remember in late '83, Holmes was supposed to get 2.55 million to defend against Page when he was the #1 contender, and Holmes, I don't really recall the total reason, but one of them was he wanted more money to fight Greg and it didn't happen.

larry holmes

David Bey

Re: David Bey