Larry Holmes?

[northern]

Not every Heavyweight is a good puncher... Jack Sharkey had a very low KO ratio as several Heavyweight Champions did.. Sharkey hit Carnera real good but couldn't hurt him.. Carnera plowed Sharkey when he caught him a good one, but they were both wiped out by Louis.. I've often heard the argument that any Heavyweight can hit.. Or anyone who weighs over 200 pounds can hit.. Yes, if they're fighting a little guy.. A tough Heavyweight may be able to take about anything they can throw..

Canelo didn't suffer ANY early defeats... He had over 40 fights including several World Title Fights before he lost to Mayweather... Lomachenko fought for the World Featherweight Title in his 2nd and 3rd professional fights.. He was robbed in his 2nd pro fight, and everybody knows it... It's hardly a real fight if your opponent deliberately weighs Heavier than the contract weight and gives up his world title -- and the officials are corrupt as Hell.

Douglas did nothing after beating Tyson... He beat ZERO ranked Heavyweights or anyone of any note... He put himself in the top bracket when he beat Tyson -- but never got back on the wagon.

Every heavyweight has weight to throw behind their punches, any boxer who steps into the professional ring knows how to throw a punch with their bodyweight behind it. This is one of the first lessons a boxer should learn, that's due to the risk vs reward argument of throwing that sort of punch and that's another matter all together.
Primo Carnera, Jack Sharkey, Joe Louis.. All of these men fought long before Holmes or Tyson, not sure why they are being mentioned now but again lets keep this debate to people who fought at the same relative time or who either man fought, not go back to the mob ruled days of boxing or otherwise.

Canelo had less then 10 fights outside of Mexico at the time of his first loss, not worth mentioning really but I said it to prove a point and as for Lomachenko your argument was that if a boxer can't get to 20 wins immediately in his career he's got a glass jaw, Lomachenko is a future hall of famer already before 15 fights.
Wonder why you didn't mention Manny Pacquiao though, point proven ? Honestly beyond caring by this stage.

Douglas went out on his terms at the end of his career, that's respectable in my opinion, especially when you think of how many boxers past or present have to go out on their back or by the doctors telling them it's over.

Anyway. Back to the point of this debate:
*Both men in their prime
*both men meet at their very best

Larry Holmes wins on points or by late TKO over Tyson. That's my opinion. For my argument see my earlier posts.

[montrealsuper]

Tyson looked somewhat ordinary and helpless against tall boxers with good jabs and movement. Even at the late age Holmes showed an ability to dominate Tyson however of course as we all know, Holmes was not unable to sustain that dominance. But we did see the flashes of the old Holmes greatness. It's very possible that the prime Holmes would have been better able and stronger to handle Tyson for 12 rounds. And also his punch resistance probably would have been far greater at a younger age and who knows the rock jawed Holmes might have been able to take Tyson's best shots, or at least beating the count and recovering enough to fight on. It's a fascinating fight - the prime Holmes vs prime Tyson. Larry Holmes could be very underrated. He could possible be The Greatest. He could have actually been better than Ali. No one can prove to the contrary. Larry Holmes without question was an incredible HWT champion and for sure one of the all time greats, maybe even the greatest.

[montrealsuper]

Let's just remind ourselves this is a heavyweight fight, the heavyweight division is one that a fight can change with one punch, these men are in the biggest division because they have one punch knockout power, any heavyweight that steps into a ring to compete has stopping power that should be obvious. Also lets be clear - I'm not comparing Norton to Frazier or foreman am I? I'm speaking for his record against people he actually fought, not comparing him against other heavyweights outside of the debate.

And early defeats do take away from a boxer do they ? So to mention a modern boxer - Alvarez who is considered one of the best pound for pound boxers today - Who lost to Floyd Mayweather, or should we consider someone else ? Lomachenko maybe ? He lost his second professional fight but won everything else since is he any less of a future great ?, Maybe Manny Pacquiao ? His first loss came against a boxer called Rustico Torrecampo who had a record of 11-4-5, no-one remembers much about it and Pacquiao is still one of the best today.

and to build up your contradictions further in one sense your saying Norton beat them (Stander and Quarry) while they were washed up ? But then Shavers was one of the last men to defeat Norton in his last few fights long after Norton had fought his wars with Holmes among others. Both men had their ups and downs but neither was a push over or an easy fight and it's damn right disrespectful to say or imply that about either.

Just to clarify about Holyfield, he was normally the smaller man in his fights, Chris Byrd and James Toney back in the early 2000's were the only ones he outweighed as a heavyweight. And as for his peak I would have said that was against Lennox Lewis really, two genuine world level boxers competing against one another, not a boxer vs brawler match up like Holyfield vs Tyson.

And just to clarify about Douglas he may have canned the title after his fight with Tyson when he lost to Holyfield, but the fact is: he beat Tyson when he (Tyson) was at his most fierce and he came back after losing to Holyfield and a 6 year lay off, even winning 8 out of his last 9 fights, all of which were 10 rounds and the sole losing effort in a 12 round fight for the then popular IBA title, that's a pretty damn good way to go out.

Not every Heavyweight is a good puncher... Jack Sharkey had a very low KO ratio as several Heavyweight Champions did.. Sharkey hit Carnera real good but couldn't hurt him.. Carnera plowed Sharkey when he caught him a good one, but they were both wiped out by Louis.. I've often heard the argument that any Heavyweight can hit.. Or anyone who weighs over 200 pounds can hit.. Yes, if they're fighting a little guy.. A tough Heavyweight may be able to take about anything they can throw..

Canelo didn't suffer ANY early defeats... He had over 40 fights including several World Title Fights before he lost to Mayweather... Lomachenko fought for the World Featherweight Title in his 2nd and 3rd professional fights.. He was robbed in his 2nd pro fight, and everybody knows it... It's hardly a real fight if your opponent deliberately weighs Heavier than the contract weight and gives up his world title -- and the officials are corrupt as Hell.

Douglas did nothing after beating Tyson... He beat ZERO ranked Heavyweights or anyone of any note... He put himself in the top bracket when he beat Tyson -- but never got back on the wagon.

Douglas showed us a masterpiece of all time greatness in just one fight (Tyson). It does not matter that he crashed to mediocrity after Tyson, what he did against Tyson was pure genius. It was one of the greatest HWT championship performances in history. Judge a man at his best not his worst, for that is what he was intended to be, wrote Norman Mailer. The night he beat Tyson, Buster Douglas could have beaten possibly any HWT champ there ever was. He was that great that night.

[Kalan]

Douglas showed us a masterpiece of all time greatness in just one fight (Tyson). It does not matter that he crashed to mediocrity after Tyson, what he did against Tyson was pure genius. It was one of the greatest HWT championship performances in history. Judge a man at his best not his worst, for that is what he was intended to be, wrote Norman Mailer. The night he beat Tyson, Buster Douglas could have beaten possibly any HWT champ there ever was. He was that great that night.

When fans see a fabulous performance they tend to go overboard with praise for it.. When they see a horrendous performance they're repulsed by it.. Douglas would have beaten Tyson, because that's the man and style of boxing that he trained singlemindedly to beat... Had Douglas faced a bigger, taller, more skilled, and harder punching Heavyweight than himself that night -- such as one of the Klitschko's, Lewis, or Joshua, who he was totally unprepared to fight because he was training to beat Tyson -- he would have been a knocked out wreck inside of 10 rounds.

[Kalan]

Every heavyweight has weight to throw behind their punches, any boxer who steps into the professional ring knows how to throw a punch with their bodyweight behind it. This is one of the first lessons a boxer should learn

It's ridiculous to talk about everybody and put them on the same level... Many Heavyweights could hit fighters like Vitali or McCall with their best shot and not accomplish a thing... They lack the natural punching power. Just like a banjo hitter lacks the swing to send a baseball soaring out of the stadium onto 5th Ave.

It's ridiculous to equate Bob Pastor with Anthony Joshua in punching power because they're both Heavyweights. Pastor was a good boxer with a ton of experience -- but had a 26% KO ratio while Joshua knocked out 100% of his opponents. Pastor couldn't get a whole lot of mustard on the hardest punch he threw. Though he was a skilled Heavyweight, he lacked the natural height, weight reach, size, strength, athleticism, and stroke to get most his his chinny opponents out. Because most of them were ALSO Heavyweights -- meaning they had more resistance to punches than Lightweights.

[Kalan]

Tyson looked somewhat ordinary and helpless against tall boxers with good jabs and movement

Not true... Tyrell Briggs was a very tall undefeated Olympic Heavyweight Champion with a good jab and good movement.. Tyson destroyed him.. Likewise Tony Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams (who gave Larry Holmes all kinds of Hell), Bruce Seldon, Tony Tucker (who knocked Buster Douglas out) and other tall boxers with good jabs and movement.. None of them had outstanding punching power or could beat Mike.

For one thing, none of them were very big or strong -- let's say the size of Lewis or Douglas -- another reason they couldn't get a hard punch on Mike.

Larry Holmes wasn't real big or powerful either -- or he would have blown Ken Norton away like most punchers did.

[montrealsuper]

Tyson looked somewhat ordinary and helpless against tall boxers with good jabs and movement

Not true... Tyrell Briggs was a very tall undefeated Olympic Heavyweight Champion with a good jab and good movement.. Tyson destroyed him.. Likewise Tony Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams (who gave Larry Holmes all kinds of Hell), Bruce Seldon, Tony Tucker (who knocked Buster Douglas out) and other tall boxers with good jabs and movement.. None of them had outstanding punching power or could beat Mike.

For one thing, none of them were very big or strong -- let's say the size of Lewis or Douglas -- another reason they couldn't get a hard punch on Mike.

Larry Holmes wasn't real big or powerful either -- or he would have blown Ken Norton away like most punchers did.

But Larry Holmes had GREATNESS. He had that special X factor quality, whether it was confidence belief, arrogance, super drive...whatever it was Larry Holmes was great. Biggs didn't have it. Biggs physically was gifted and had the tools but so do a lot of big guys (Derrick Jefferson, LeRoy Jones, Ernie Terrell, James J Woody, Alex Zolkin, Henry Akinwande, Jameel McCline). It takes more than that. Holmes was extraordinary and mere mortals like you can't explain his dominance and greatness, but it happened. Tyson said about Biggs in his book that he was good but he just didn't have the confidence.

[Tony1244]

Tyson looked somewhat ordinary and helpless against tall boxers with good jabs and movement

Not true... Tyrell Briggs was a very tall undefeated Olympic Heavyweight Champion with a good jab and good movement.. Tyson destroyed him.. Likewise Tony Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams (who gave Larry Holmes all kinds of Hell), Bruce Seldon, Tony Tucker (who knocked Buster Douglas out) and other tall boxers with good jabs and movement.. None of them had outstanding punching power or could beat Mike.

For one thing, none of them were very big or strong -- let's say the size of Lewis or Douglas -- another reason they couldn't get a hard punch on Mike.

Larry Holmes wasn't real big or powerful either -- or he would have blown Ken Norton away like most punchers did.

But Larry Holmes had GREATNESS. He had that special X factor quality, whether it was confidence belief, arrogance, super drive...whatever it was Larry Holmes was great. Biggs didn't have it. Biggs physically was gifted and had the tools but so do a lot of big guys (Derrick Jefferson, LeRoy Jones, Ernie Terrell, James J Woody, Alex Zolkin, Henry Akinwande, Jameel McCline). It takes more than that. Holmes was extraordinary and mere mortals like you can't explain his dominance and greatness, but it happened. Tyson said about Biggs in his book that he was good but he just didn't have the confidence.

James J. Woody. Reminds me of the Sesame Street song, one of these things is not like the others. Actually, there are a few other trial horses there as well. Some of them like McCline started very late. Others like Briggs had physical problems like asthma. Others an iffy chin. But absolutely there is a lot more to it than passing the physique or size test.

[Kalan]

Tyson looked somewhat ordinary and helpless against tall boxers with good jabs and movement

Not true... Tyrell Briggs was a very tall undefeated Olympic Heavyweight Champion with a good jab and good movement.. Tyson destroyed him.. Likewise Tony Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams (who gave Larry Holmes all kinds of Hell), Bruce Seldon, Tony Tucker (who knocked Buster Douglas out) and other tall boxers with good jabs and movement.. None of them had outstanding punching power or could beat Mike.

For one thing, none of them were very big or strong -- let's say the size of Lewis or Douglas -- another reason they couldn't get a hard punch on Mike.

Larry Holmes wasn't real big or powerful either -- or he would have blown Ken Norton away like most punchers did.

But Larry Holmes had GREATNESS. He had that special X factor quality, whether it was confidence belief, arrogance, super drive...whatever it was Larry Holmes was great. Biggs didn't have it. Biggs physically was gifted and had the tools but so do a lot of big guys (Derrick Jefferson, LeRoy Jones, Ernie Terrell, James J Woody, Alex Zolkin, Henry Akinwande, Jameel McCline). It takes more than that. Holmes was extraordinary and mere mortals like you can't explain his dominance and greatness, but it happened. Tyson said about Biggs in his book that he was good but he just didn't have the confidence.

X factors and a few dollars will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks...

Holmes was great for his DAY like Marciano was great for HIS day...and John L Sullivan was great for HIS day... and Louis was great for HIS day... Let me ask -- WHO did Holmes fight in his prime who had Tyson's speed, power, and tank-like size and strength to run over 212 size guys??? .... Don't try to say Trevor Berbick. Berbick's speed, power and skill where low rank.... Don't try to give me Ken Norton. His willowy legs and unexceptional boxing finesse couldn't hold off a single George Foreman attack. He did better with Holmes and Ali... Don't try to say Mike Weaver. Weaver weighed 203 for Holmes and had holes in his defense you could you could drive a caravan through---but given his style he was a tough opponent for Larry. Holmes met NOBODY like Mike Tyson til he met Mike Tyson.

Despite all that and picking Tyson to win, it's a style thing... Holmes was a better all-around Heavyweight, but there wasn't a 213-pound boxer who lacked exceptional punching power who Tyson couldn't run over and get out of there if he were the same Tyson who crushed MIchael Spinks.. Holmes WAS a very great and skilled boxer. Holmes WAS an all-around boxer with a strong body attack and inside game. Holmes WOULD have a better chance of beating Lennox Lewis or Ray Mercer than the best Mike Tyson there ever was... But he just wouldn't beat Mike. Wrong guy. Wrong style. No way in Hell.

You're not going to match Joe Frazier with George Foreman are you??? ... Joe was a strong favorite ... But knowing what you know why would you???

[Flump]

Not true... Tyrell Briggs was a very tall undefeated Olympic Heavyweight Champion with a good jab and good movement.. Tyson destroyed him.. Likewise Tony Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams (who gave Larry Holmes all kinds of Hell), Bruce Seldon, Tony Tucker (who knocked Buster Douglas out) and other tall boxers with good jabs and movement.. None of them had outstanding punching power or could beat Mike.

For one thing, none of them were very big or strong -- let's say the size of Lewis or Douglas -- another reason they couldn't get a hard punch on Mike.

Larry Holmes wasn't real big or powerful either -- or he would have blown Ken Norton away like most punchers did.

But Larry Holmes had GREATNESS. He had that special X factor quality, whether it was confidence belief, arrogance, super drive...whatever it was Larry Holmes was great. Biggs didn't have it. Biggs physically was gifted and had the tools but so do a lot of big guys (Derrick Jefferson, LeRoy Jones, Ernie Terrell, James J Woody, Alex Zolkin, Henry Akinwande, Jameel McCline). It takes more than that. Holmes was extraordinary and mere mortals like you can't explain his dominance and greatness, but it happened. Tyson said about Biggs in his book that he was good but he just didn't have the confidence.

X factors and a few dollars will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks...

Holmes was great for his DAY like Marciano was great for HIS day...and John L Sullivan was great for HIS day... and Louis was great for HIS day... Let me ask -- WHO did Holmes fight in his prime who had Tyson's speed, power, and tank-like size and strength to run over 212 size guys??? .... Don't try to say Trevor Berbick. Berbick's speed, power and skill where low rank.... Don't try to give me Ken Norton. His willowy legs and unexceptional boxing finesse couldn't hold off a single George Foreman attack. He did better with Holmes and Ali... Don't try to say Mike Weaver. Weaver weighed 203 for Holmes and had holes in his defense you could you could drive a caravan through---but given his style he was a tough opponent for Larry. Holmes met NOBODY like Mike Tyson til he met Mike Tyson.

Despite all that and picking Tyson to win, it's a style thing... Holmes was a better all-around Heavyweight, but there wasn't a 213-pound boxer who lacked exceptional punching power who Tyson couldn't run over and get out of there if he were the same Tyson who crushed MIchael Spinks.. Holmes WAS a very great and skilled boxer. Holmes WAS an all-around boxer with a strong body attack and inside game. Holmes WOULD have a better chance of beating Lennox Lewis or Ray Mercer than the best Mike Tyson there ever was... But he just wouldn't beat Mike. Wrong guy. Wrong style. No way in Hell.

You're not going to match Joe Frazier with George Foreman are you??? ... Joe was a strong favorite ... But knowing what you know why would you???

You think the peak Larry Holmes would have a chance against the undefeated, peak Ray Mercer Kalan?

[montrealsuper]

Ali lacked exceptional power too. Holmes was uncanny and a genius with arguably the best jab of all time. Holmes could indeed be the GOAT. Cut it out with this silly 'he was just the best of a bad lot' era bs. Holmes made his era look like nothing. That's what ATGs do.

[Kalan]

You think the peak Larry Holmes would have a chance against the undefeated, peak Ray Mercer Kalan?

Here's the way that dynamic would and DID break down... Mercer had a style I would compare to Foreman.. Very big, strong, tough, and contemptuous of Heavyweights who were supposed to be big punchers, but were easy to hit -- such as Morrison. Neither man put a head on you or attacked exceptionally well, so a great boxer could take his time with them---and not feel pressured.. Mercer's punches were a little harder to see, and more sophisticated than Foreman's, but neither were real good boxers. Neither had an arsenal of tricky feints, really smooth jabs, or slick right leads.. Especially for the Holmes fight, Mercer wasn't polished or finished.

Therefore Mercer was made to order for Larry Holmes... Given his style advantage it was probably Holmes' easiest fight against a truly world class Heavyweight, which Mercer was... If Jimmy Young had a nice pinking jab, and slick right leads and combos, Holmes had better weapons all around and moderate punching power to go with it. But on rare occasions Holmes would try to exert his punching power and that was always a mistake for him. If you're a fabulous boxer and you start loading your punches and trading, that's taking the best part of your game and tossing it down the can.

Now if you have ATG punching power you can always improve you boxing skills.. You're not trying be somebody you're not because the game is Boxing. This is something George Foreman was aware of when he made his comeback and focused on greater discipline, patience, skill, and deception -- and almost started out all over again like a 4-round fighter.. But if you're the greatest boxer going, it doesn't mean you're ever going to be a great puncher if you're not.. It's not akin to boxing skills, because you're either a great puncher or you're not -- and there isn't much you're ever going to do about it.

[elmersalsa]

Douglas showed us a masterpiece of all time greatness in just one fight (Tyson). It does not matter that he crashed to mediocrity after Tyson, what he did against Tyson was pure genius. It was one of the greatest HWT championship performances in history. Judge a man at his best not his worst, for that is what he was intended to be, wrote Norman Mailer. The night he beat Tyson, Buster Douglas could have beaten possibly any HWT champ there ever was. He was that great that night.

When fans see a fabulous performance they tend to go overboard with praise for it.. When they see a horrendous performance they're repulsed by it.. Douglas would have beaten Tyson, because that's the man and style of boxing that he trained singlemindedly to beat... Had Douglas faced a bigger, taller, more skilled, and harder punching Heavyweight than himself that night -- such as one of the Klitschko's, Lewis, or Joshua, who he was totally unprepared to fight because he was training to beat Tyson -- he would have been a knocked out wreck inside of 10 rounds.

That night in Tokyo I would put my money on Buster Douglas against Lennox Lewis, Vitali Klitschko and Anthony Joshua, Kalan. Douglas that night was TERRIFIC. On that night, he whups any heavyweight in history....END OF STORY.

[montrealsuper]

Douglas showed us a masterpiece of all time greatness in just one fight (Tyson). It does not matter that he crashed to mediocrity after Tyson, what he did against Tyson was pure genius. It was one of the greatest HWT championship performances in history. Judge a man at his best not his worst, for that is what he was intended to be, wrote Norman Mailer. The night he beat Tyson, Buster Douglas could have beaten possibly any HWT champ there ever was. He was that great that night.

When fans see a fabulous performance they tend to go overboard with praise for it.. When they see a horrendous performance they're repulsed by it.. Douglas would have beaten Tyson, because that's the man and style of boxing that he trained singlemindedly to beat... Had Douglas faced a bigger, taller, more skilled, and harder punching Heavyweight than himself that night -- such as one of the Klitschko's, Lewis, or Joshua, who he was totally unprepared to fight because he was training to beat Tyson -- he would have been a knocked out wreck inside of 10 rounds.

That night in Tokyo I would put my money on Buster Douglas against Lennox Lewis, Vitali Klitschko and Anthony Joshua, Kalan. Douglas that night was TERRIFIC. On that night, he whups any heavyweight in history....END OF STORY.

I hear you brother, pure boxing genius masterpiece work of art that night by Buster.

[northern]

Every heavyweight has weight to throw behind their punches, any boxer who steps into the professional ring knows how to throw a punch with their bodyweight behind it. This is one of the first lessons a boxer should learn

It's ridiculous to talk about everybody and put them on the same level... Many Heavyweights could hit fighters like Vitali or McCall with their best shot and not accomplish a thing... They lack the natural punching power. Just like a banjo hitter lacks the swing to send a baseball soaring out of the stadium onto 5th Ave.

It's ridiculous to equate Bob Pastor with Anthony Joshua in punching power because they're both Heavyweights. Pastor was a good boxer with a ton of experience -- but had a 26% KO ratio while Joshua knocked out 100% of his opponents. Pastor couldn't get a whole lot of mustard on the hardest punch he threw. Though he was a skilled Heavyweight, he lacked the natural height, weight reach, size, strength, athleticism, and stroke to get most his his chinny opponents out. Because most of them were ALSO Heavyweights -- meaning they had more resistance to punches than Lightweights.

I don't think you're reading my posts correctly and I think you are getting too personally involved in this now.
This debate started as who would win between Holmes and Tyson, why you keep bringing boxers from outside of the debate into it makes very little sense, in my past comments I mentioned people related to the two men and gave my opinions on the failings of BOTH Tyson and Holmes, I'm not biased towards Holmes being superior to Tyson but with both men at their primes Holmes was a superior boxer and Tyson did struggle against good boxers, Yes he beat many of them but not the very best of them.

Otherwise I gave a statement that is true, ANY boxer (professional, amateur or otherwise) learns how to throw a punch with their bodyweight behind it.
Knockout punches aren't just related to size, everyone understands that.
Accumulated damage, area struck, speed-velocity-power of the impact, generated power via kinetic linking, timing of the strike, all these things and more can be taken into account before you can gauge the effectiveness of a KO punch.

Get back to the debate of Tyson vs Holmes and use facts and figures from the people they fought, not from boxers back in the 30's - 50's or modern heavyweights, stick to the facts relating to the two people in this debate.

[Kalan]

Tyson looked somewhat ordinary and helpless against tall boxers with good jabs and movement

Not true... Tyrell Briggs was a very tall undefeated Olympic Heavyweight Champion with a good jab and good movement.. Tyson destroyed him.. Likewise Tony Tubbs, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick, Carl Williams (who gave Larry Holmes all kinds of Hell), Bruce Seldon, Tony Tucker (who knocked Buster Douglas out) and other tall boxers with good jabs and movement.. None of them had outstanding punching power or could beat Mike.

For one thing, none of them were very big or strong -- let's say the size of Lewis or Douglas -- another reason they couldn't get a hard punch on Mike.

Larry Holmes wasn't real big or powerful either -- or he would have blown Ken Norton away like most punchers did.

Here are some guys ALL over 6' 3" tall that made Tyson look somewhat confused and ordinary.

Mitch Green
Bonecrusher
Tony Tucker

and here are the ones over 6' 3" that stopped him

Douglas
Lewis
Williams
McBride

No one would call at least 5 of them ATG class.

As for Holmes, without doubt an ATG top 5 Heavy at least.

You've GOT to be kidding me... Mitch Green doesn't make the cut skill wise... Bonecrusher certainly doesn't... McBride??? Tyson was DEAD when he fought McBride... Williams??? Tyson was gone when that fight was signed... The only top flight boxers were Douglas, Lewis, and Tucker..Tucker only weighed 223, not real big... Tucker didn't have the confidence of Douglas and he wasn't that brilliant... Mike couldn't hurt Tucker, but he outboxed him substantially.

I don't see where Larry Holmes comes in with any of the above... Holmes was more like Carl "The Truth" Williams than any guys on your list... The Holmes-Williams (Truth) fight was very close and they were very similar... The Tyson-Williams (Truth) fight??? NOT so close -- a crushing 1st-round KO.

[Kalan]

No one would call at least 5 of them ATG class.

As for your mention of Williams, I see you conveniently leave out the fact that Carl was previously crushed by Weaver in 2 rounds. The same Weaver that Larry wore down and stopped in 12.

Nobody would call 6 of them ATG class... Unless you want to stamp Buster Douglas into that class and no knowledgeable person would -- off 1 amazing fight.

Who said an unaccomplished contender couldn't beat an ATG on a given night??? As they say in the NFL "Any given Sunday." That's because so many schlock ass teams have crushed so many great teams.. They score a couple early touchdowns, which fires up a load of confidence and enthusiasm, and they start to roll.. The whole psychological aspect changes on a dime as the guys who got tired of getting their asses pounded return the favor.. Sometimes 2 halves of a game are so different you wonder where the team who played the 1st half went.

In Boxing the KO punch is the wild card. Even if you don't land perfectly you may hurt your highly favored opponent enough so he doesn't get out of the round. That’s what Weaver did to Williams. In Weaver's next fight he got careless and James Smith flattened him in the 1st round, but Weaver won his rematch with Smith.. Holmes got caught on the chin a couple times. He was able to escape inept efforts of unskilled opponents to finish him off..

All that has nothing to do with the fact that Larry Holmes and Truth Williams had similar styles and your Magnificent 7 fought nothing like Holmes... The Holmes-Williams and Tyson-Williams fights are better barometers.

[Tony1244]

Ali lacked exceptional power too. Holmes was uncanny and a genius with arguably the best jab of all time. Holmes could indeed be the GOAT. Cut it out with this silly 'he was just the best of a bad lot' era bs. Holmes made his era look like nothing. That's what ATGs do.

Good point on Holmes even though he did have close fights with Witherspoon and Carl Williams. Those guys never kept it going which is important if you're in the GOAT category. Larry did.

[Kalan]

Holmes was the GOHT in the 70's and 80's -- til Mike Tyson came along and bombed Holmes and Spinks out like they were nothing...like taking out the trash.

So, to say Holmes could compete with Joshua??? When a raw swinger like Reynaldo Snipes clocked him??? ... The incoming would rip Larry out quickly.

[Tony1244]

Holmes was the GOHT in the 70's and 80's -- til Mike Tyson came along and bombed Holmes and Spinks out like they were nothing...like taking out the trash.

So, to say Holmes could compete with Joshua??? When a raw swinger like Reynaldo Snipes clocked him??? ... The incoming would rip Larry out quickly.

You're historical facts are correct but I see a pattern that you continuously discount the age of a fighter.

Ali was a shell of himself when he fought Holmes. Homes was way, way passed his prime when he fought Tyson.

[Kalan]

Okay... How old was Wladimir Klitschko when he bombed out Kubrat Pulev??? Same age as Holmes and Ali with as many losses... But he looked terrific.

In his next fight with Bryant Jennings, at 39, he didn't look good that great...or against Fury at the same age.. But he did look really sharp for Joshua at 41.

He turned the clock back.

[Kalan]

As for your mention of Williams, I see you conveniently leave out the fact that Carl was previously crushed by Weaver in 2 rounds. The same Weaver that Larry wore down and stopped in 12.

Nobody would call 6 of them ATG class... Unless you want to stamp Buster Douglas into that class and no knowledgeable person would -- off 1 amazing fight.

Who said an unaccomplished contender couldn't beat an ATG on a given night??? As they say in the NFL "Any given Sunday." That's because so many schlock ass teams have crushed so many great teams.. They score a couple early touchdowns, which fires up a load of confidence and enthusiasm, and they start to roll.. The whole psychological aspect changes on a dime as the guys who got tired of getting their asses pounded return the favor.. Sometimes 2 halves of a game are so different you wonder where the team who played the 1st half went.

In Boxing the KO punch is the wild card. Even if you don't land perfectly you may hurt your highly favored opponent enough so he doesn't get out of the round. That’s what Weaver did to Williams. In Weaver's next fight he got careless and James Smith flattened him in the 1st round, but Weaver won his rematch with Smith.. Holmes got caught on the chin a couple times. He was able to escape inept efforts of unskilled opponents to finish him off..

All that has nothing to do with the fact that Larry Holmes and Truth Williams had similar styles and your Magnificent 7 fought nothing like Holmes... The Holmes-Williams and Tyson-Williams fights are better barometers.

What part of " I couldn't care less about your egotistical, self promoting nonsense " is so hard for you to understand?

FACT.

You tried to make a big thing about Tyson destroying Williams in a round.

FACT.

You didn't acknowledge the fact that Weaver had already crushed Williams in 2 rounds, dropping him 3 times in the process.

FACT.

You tried to use how Holmes fought against Williams, compared to how Tyson fought against Williams, as a barometer as to how the pair would have fared had both been in their primes, and fighting each other.

Look...Tyson destroying Williams in a round wasn't a big thing...but it happened.. Holmes didn't KO Williams in 1 or 2 rounds.. That was a tough contest.

Weaver was a good puncher... Why couldn't he get somebody out??? He weighed a lot more than he did for Holmes. He nailed one and not the other.

The way Williams fared against Holmes and Tyson is 1 measure of their firepower and strength. Tyson was faster and better than Weaver the Beaver.

[montrealsuper]

Holmes would have a major problem with Joshua only because of the size difference. Joshua is just too big. Just like Vitali Wladimir and Lennox would steamroll Marciano, Frazier, Patterson simply because they are too big too strong.

If Holmes was about 6-6 250, with a body similar in size to Joshua, it's about an even fight and the one with the greater will would survive and prevail. Both Holmes and Joshua have both shown they have extraordinary wills to win. Holmes is a top five ATG and I believe Joshua is heading into that elite pantheon too.

[Kalan]

Damned good point.. Joshua is already there when people start evaluating his skills with a cold assessment instead of through "golden era" glasses.

There's so many more Heavyweights today from so many more countries where they never had Professional Boxing until Clinton was president.. Now even China is developing Heavyweight boxers. I have no doubt they'll have World Heavyweight Champions in another decade or so because of their staggeringly vast population. Japan may not have a Heavyweight Champion for a while -- because great athletes seldom come 6'4" X 230 and bigger in Japan.

How many ranked Heavyweights have we ever seen from the Ukraine, South Africa, Nigeria, Russia, Australia, Croatia, New Zealand, Scandinavia, Poland, and other Eastern European countries and China before the 1990’s? ... We’ve never even seen Heavyweight Champions from England before the 1990’s. They never had Heavyweights of size or capability before.. But they’re serious about Boxing nowadays in the UK.. Look how many good big boys they have.

The United States of America is only 4% of the World’s population, but we’ve dominated the Heavyweight Division since the bare knuckle era ended – with only Fitzsimmons, Burns, Schmeling, Carnera, and Johansson able to sneak a peek at the title for mostly for very short lived reigns.

Forget the Maskaev’s, Chagaev’s, Ibragamov’s, Valuev’s and other poorly skilled foreign Heavyweights who’ve claimed World Heavyweight Titles since the dawn of the 3rd Millennium – you never saw foreign Heavyweights with the abilities of Lennox Lewis, Wladimir Klitschko, Vitali Klitschko, David Haye, Alexander Povetkin, Luis Ortiz, or Anthony Joshua in the paid ranks until after the Iron Curtain opened and unleashed a flood of talent and competition worldwide.

Deontay Wilder is an Olympic Bronze Medal winner and fine Heavyweight -- but I believe Anthony Joshua is going to reign for as long as Wladimir Klitschko – and then it’s going to be another foreign Lineal Heavyweight Champion taking over from AJ.

[Kalan]

That's right ... Weaver did lose the Smith rematch. I got that factoid wrong but I meant to say he went the distance rather than getting flattened in the 1st round.. He was getting older and ring wear and tear was catching up with him.. His best career efforts came in the 2 years following his Holmes loss, with KO wins over John Tate and Gerrie Coetzee and beating undefeated James Tillis.. He beat a number of Heavyweight Champions.

Weaver was a very good puncher but a poor boxer.. For the Holmes rematch it didn't matter what he weighed.. He was nearing 50-years-old and hadn't fought in over a year and was basically retired.. He had 1 fight in the previous 3 years.. He took the Holmes rematch for the money. He had a great many losses, so losing another fight to ATG Holmes was not a horrific event for Mike Weaver at the time. It was a day at the office.

Mike Weaver won an unlikely Heavyweight Championship and he can always hang his hat on that -- as well as his smashing upset KO of undefeated John Tate. It was like his KO of Carl Williams.. If Weaver hit you real good you were outta here.. Chris Berman called him Dream Weaver.