BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:- Blubber Lar didn't fight in the golden era of the Fabulous Four, Ali, Joe, George, and Ken because he was vastly inferior. You can't spin it any other way, but some of you get an B for Blubbery effort.
Lar won a DKing political decision against a faded Norton because he was more manageable with less miles on the odometer. No rematch tells us what they thought their chances were for that given Blubs was running on fumes the first fight and all busted up. 73 George clubs down 78 Lar every day and thrice on Sundays, easy work.
After getting screwed by Ali and King, George retired, and that giant sucking sound we heard in response was Lar moaning about how nobody loved him as he put together a Tommy Burns cast of no hope and kid dope defenses. The WBA title had far more talented fighters in Dokes, Page, Witherspoon, Tate, Coetzee, and Tubbs actually fighting each other. The five times Lar actually stepped up against a standing champion who had actually won his title in the ring, he was trounced, nor was he a factor when George came back to take the heavyweight world by storm.
The 99 fight against your dear Lar was stillborn when the promoter couldn't come up with the guarantee for George. George already does enough for charity and had no need to make a charity contribution to Lar's coffers nor with the undefeated Lee Canalito's offer in 2011. Lee sure wasn't interested in Blubber Lar, but Butterbean would gladly knock him down again and send him on another chicken run. Is Blubs still moaning about George like he did in his HOF induction where he was thrown out of the very first day before they allowed him back in?
Your boxing hero ducked enough prime talents so as to make an encyclopedia. Dwayne Bobick would be happy to knock him out again if he wants a fight, but naw, no way. Maybe Marvis if they find a forklift for Blubber's ring entrance.
Kurgen22 wrote:Larry by UD. I've always thought he was one of the most underated Champs ever. Just wish he had retired after losing to Spinks.
I agree ,Holmes Ud and he is underated .
Larry Holmes is not underrated.
I would bet that, with the exception of a certain poster on this forum, who seems to have the most irrational dislike of Holmes I have ever seen (one can only assume that Larry owes him money, or stole his wife or something ), every boxing fan alive would have Holmes in their top 10 HWs of all-time.
Last edited by Syntax Error on 30 Sep 2016, 14:30, edited 1 time in total.
Kurgen22 wrote:Larry by UD. I've always thought he was one of the most underated Champs ever. Just wish he had retired after losing to Spinks.
I agree ,Holmes Ud and he is underated .
Larry Holmes is not underrated.
I would bet that, with the exception of a certain poster on this forum, who seems to have the most irrational dislike of Holmes I have ever seen (one can only assume that Larry owes him money, or stole his wife or something ), every boxing fan alive would have Holmes in their top 10 HWs of all-time.
Keko wrote:
I agree ,Holmes Ud and he is underated .
Larry Holmes is not underrated.
I would bet that, with the exception of a certain poster on this forum, who seems to have the most irrational dislike of Holmes I have ever seen (one can only assume that Larry owes him money, or stole his wife or something ), every boxing fan alive would have Holmes in their top 10 HWs of all-time.
Yes top 10 but really he is top 5 sure
I agree.
He's in my top 5 too, but I'm guessing that other folk might have differing ideas.
Love reading people predict that anyone would have knocked out Larry Holmes all day, every day.
Or that Larry Holmes would have boxed Foremans head off, Foreman couldn't deal with the jab and wouldn't have laid a glove on a boxer of Holmes' ability.
It's frankly ridiculous to claim anyone would have knocked out a prime 78 Holmes, let alone do it 10 times out of 10.
If Earnie Shaver couldn't finish him off you know that man had a chin. It took another 10 years for anyone to stop him. A viscous Tyson was the only man to do it and he did it to a near 40 year old man coming off an almost 2 year lay of after back to back defeats.
No-one dominates a prime Holmes IMO, no one in history, not Ali or Louis. No one would beat him, guaranteed, 10 out of 10.
As for dominating a prime 73 George Foreman? Being too much for him, comprehensively out boxing him, again beating him 10 out of 10.
Nonsense! This man was punching holes in Joe Frazier.
Ali had to let him near beat him to death to beat him in what was a tactical masterstroke. Ali couldn't simply out box him, the man that tops most peoples HW list and he knew how to jab as well as just about anyone.
The fight is a tough one to call and I won't argue over your pick.
But to say anyone walks all over either man in their prime is downright disrespectful, blatantly biased and frankly, fornicating stupid.
davie wrote:
As for dominating a prime 73 George Foreman? Being too much for him, comprehensively out boxing him, again beating him 10 out of 10.
Nonsense! This man was punching holes in Joe Frazier.
Styles make fights though, Frazier was made for Foreman. He was short and tried to stand toe to toe with Foreman. He simply wasn't big or strong enough. Hitting Frazier was easy, Holmes would've been very different.
), every boxing fan alive would have Holmes in their top 10 HWs of all-time.
sure