The point you were making was that Holyfield was winning more decisively against Foreman than Moorer was. Again, Moorer-Foreman was not even close. Moorer was easily defeating Foreman. Holyfield had a tough time with Big George while Moorer was putting on a boxing clinic. For the most part, Holyfield just stood right in front of Foreman. Not exactly a boxing clinic. Moorer was the one showing angles, otherwise he would have been knocked out within three. Case in point, stands in front of Foreman round 10, zzzzzzzzz ...dempseyfire wrote:Holyfield was showing Foreman more angles and hurting him occasionally.
Moorer outpunched Foreman but George always got in a few good shots. And this was a Foreman slower then the one who fought Evander.
I hate to say it, but Larry Holmes=overrated???
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
You should listen to your Dad. He's talking sense.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:silkov, what do u think holmes prime started and lasted till??
IMO holmes prime started in the first shavers fight-cooney fight, i noticed signs of aging aftet that, and in the witherspoon fight.
what was holmes peaak fight??? IMO either leon spinks, or trevor berbick fight . he took apart a tough berbick dominated him winning 13 rounds on my card, then after they both almost got in a street fight
- i was talking with my dad about holmess and he said what separates holmes from other champions and what makes him an all tim great wasthe mental part. he said holmes went out there knowing he was gonna win, just that absolute confidence that no matter what ur gonna win. every time holmes when out there he got the job done, even on his worst days. and he said only few greaat heavyweight champsions had that absolute confidence and warrior mentality like like marciano, frazier, louis, ali. he said it was holmes warrior mentality and amazing hert that made him an all time great. he said holmes had all the skill in the world, but without the heart he wouldnt have been able to get through the rough times like weaver, norton, shavers, snipes. it was the mental part as well as the physical part that enabled him to be one of the best. he rates holmes in the top 5.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
hey collins,
i finally spoke to tedspoon heres what he had to say
"It was from a New York paper. Not the NY times though.
Ted Spoon reads that Walcott controlled the fight through rounds 1-4 in a measured, but solid manner. He was tiring visibly each round, relying on his movement to make Simon miss and then counter. Abe was a tough pug though.
During round 5 Walcott was already running on empty and got clubbed to the floor. Joe did not train for this fight. He called in a day before, and agreed."
i finally spoke to tedspoon heres what he had to say
"It was from a New York paper. Not the NY times though.
Ted Spoon reads that Walcott controlled the fight through rounds 1-4 in a measured, but solid manner. He was tiring visibly each round, relying on his movement to make Simon miss and then counter. Abe was a tough pug though.
During round 5 Walcott was already running on empty and got clubbed to the floor. Joe did not train for this fight. He called in a day before, and agreed."
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
A callow youth started this thread, I believe. Can he not be prevailed upon to change it to something less offensive? The edit function is available to the originator of a post.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:the title of this thread is making me sick, holmes is defintley top 10 and personally i feel top 5
Also, thanks for the info from Spoony. I'm glad the report of his death was untrue. But it is no more than you posted before really. I'd like to see the actual report or at least a lead to the actual paper, date and page. You alleged that Spoony was a historian. It's normal for a historian to quote their source. Well, it is for a REAL historian.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Collins2000 wrote:A callow youth started this thread, I believe. Can he not be prevailed upon to change it to something less offensive? The edit function is available to the originator of a post.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:the title of this thread is making me sick, holmes is defintley top 10 and personally i feel top 5
Also, thanks for the info from Spoony. I'm glad the report of his death was untrue. But it is no more than you posted before really. I'd like to see the actual report or at least a lead to the actual paper, date and page. You alleged that Spoony was a historian. It's normal for a historian to quote their source. Well, it is for a REAL historian.
hes probably a "self" proclaimed historian, i will ask him for the full report
hey collins, ever since u made fun of rory mckloskey with that braddock remark, he hasnt posted since. i think u sent him crying to his mother.
Larry in his day could hang with any heavyweight in history. Be it George Foreman, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Muhammad Ali (prime guys), Joe Frazier, Lennox Lewis, Ezzard Charles, Jack Johnson, etc etc etc.
That being said, I still wish his era had more consistancy. While it was a solid era, it gets little credit because the top fighters (besides Larry) could not keep a solid win streak. Wasted talent era. If the talent was not wasted though, everyone would be singing a different tune about Holmes.
Also, how differently do you think Holmes would be viewed historically if he had an Ali-esque personality? Regardless, he was one of the most physically gifted heavyweights of all-time, although not necessarily the best. Top five material in any matter, though.
That being said, I still wish his era had more consistancy. While it was a solid era, it gets little credit because the top fighters (besides Larry) could not keep a solid win streak. Wasted talent era. If the talent was not wasted though, everyone would be singing a different tune about Holmes.
Also, how differently do you think Holmes would be viewed historically if he had an Ali-esque personality? Regardless, he was one of the most physically gifted heavyweights of all-time, although not necessarily the best. Top five material in any matter, though.
Thing is the other heavyweights of Holmes era are also underrated because they followed Norton, Frazier, Foreman, Quarry etc... I think the fighters of Holmes era were not far short of those of Ali's... and they were a darn sight better than what has followed them since!...evndrbsn wrote:Larry in his day could hang with any heavyweight in history. Be it George Foreman, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Muhammad Ali (prime guys), Joe Frazier, Lennox Lewis, Ezzard Charles, Jack Johnson, etc etc etc.
That being said, I still wish his era had more consistancy. While it was a solid era, it gets little credit because the top fighters (besides Larry) could not keep a solid win streak. Wasted talent era. If the talent was not wasted though, everyone would be singing a different tune about Holmes.
Also, how differently do you think Holmes would be viewed historically if he had an Ali-esque personality? Regardless, he was one of the most physically gifted heavyweights of all-time, although not necessarily the best. Top five material in any matter, though.
With hindsight I agree. A lot of writers were unhappy with the 1980s bunch becasue of what had come before. I was a kid and didn't know any other eras at the time. the 1990s HWs were pretty good too.silkov wrote:Thing is the other heavyweights of Holmes era are also underrated because they followed Norton, Frazier, Foreman, Quarry etc... I think the fighters of Holmes era were not far short of those of Ali's... and they were a darn sight better than what has followed them since!...evndrbsn wrote:Larry in his day could hang with any heavyweight in history. Be it George Foreman, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Muhammad Ali (prime guys), Joe Frazier, Lennox Lewis, Ezzard Charles, Jack Johnson, etc etc etc.
That being said, I still wish his era had more consistancy. While it was a solid era, it gets little credit because the top fighters (besides Larry) could not keep a solid win streak. Wasted talent era. If the talent was not wasted though, everyone would be singing a different tune about Holmes.
Also, how differently do you think Holmes would be viewed historically if he had an Ali-esque personality? Regardless, he was one of the most physically gifted heavyweights of all-time, although not necessarily the best. Top five material in any matter, though.
Ezzard wrote:With hindsight I agree. A lot of writers were unhappy with the 1980s bunch becasue of what had come before. I was a kid and didn't know any other eras at the time. the 1990s HWs were pretty good too.silkov wrote:But the 90s basically had Tyson, Bowe, Holifield, Lewis... not much else... Moorer, Mercer, Mccall, Morrison, Ruddock.... thats it really... the fact that 40 + yearolds Holmes and Foreman were able to comeback and make a mark in this era says a lot....evndrbsn wrote:Larry in his day could hang with any heavyweight in history. Be it George Foreman, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Muhammad Ali (prime guys), Joe Frazier, Lennox Lewis, Ezzard Charles, Jack Johnson, etc etc etc.
That being said, I still wish his era had more consistancy. While it was a solid era, it gets little credit because the top fighters (besides Larry) could not keep a solid win streak. Wasted talent era. If the talent was not wasted though, everyone would be singing a different tune about Holmes.
Also, how differently do you think Holmes would be viewed historically if he had an Ali-esque personality? Regardless, he was one of the most physically gifted heavyweights of all-time, although not necessarily the best. Top five material in any matter, though.
Thing is the other heavyweights of Holmes era are also underrated because they followed Norton, Frazier, Foreman, Quarry etc... I think the fighters of Holmes era were not far short of those of Ali's... and they were a darn sight better than what has followed them since!...
Silkov, whilst we're on a Holmes thread I read on here somewhere about Holmes between rounds asking for his blue bottle. Obviously the idea being that this one had something more than water in it. Have you ever heard of this before? I'm interested as it is new to me. Anyone else ever heard of this in relation to Holmes?
I've never seen or heard anything of that sort in any Holmes fight and I have all his world title bouts etc... what fight is it supposed to have happened in?...Ezzard wrote:Silkov, whilst we're on a Holmes thread I read on here somewhere about Holmes between rounds asking for his blue bottle. Obviously the idea being that this one had something more than water in it. Have you ever heard of this before? I'm interested as it is new to me. Anyone else ever heard of this in relation to Holmes?
Don't know which fight. I only ever read about it on here.
I don't know if he did or didn't. I think most fighters would do anything to win and I'm not criticising them for this. It's the hardest sport there is. It would go against someone if it was ever found out in terms of their legacy but I understand why they'd do it.
I don't know if he did or didn't. I think most fighters would do anything to win and I'm not criticising them for this. It's the hardest sport there is. It would go against someone if it was ever found out in terms of their legacy but I understand why they'd do it.