Larry Holmes (1982) against the current HWs ?

[ValMar]

Where would be his position today ?

[DrDuke]

I can see only one possible guy of the nowdays, who could have been able to outbox prime Holmes, it's The Gypsy King.

[SenorPipino]

Holmes kicks everyone's ass.

A solid complete fighter. His jab alone would leave all of them looking like confused statues.

Holmes has forgotten more about boxing then all of today's heavyweights combined are ever going to know.

[oogiebe]

Holmes kicks everyone's ass.

A solid complete fighter. His jab alone would leave all of them looking like confused statues.

Holmes has forgotten more about boxing then all of today's heavyweights combined are ever going to know.

He was certainly an excellent boxer and ring tactician. That jab is the thing for me. Best I've ever seen. And he had variations of that jab. Jackhammer; range finder; pumping; etc. I'm not saying he beats all of the titans of this era, but he would have had great fights against them for sure. Certainly beats 4-10 relatively easy.

[Syntax Error]

Holmes would be number 1 at best, number 2 at worst.

I'm certain he'd beat Wilder; I'd tip him to beat Joshua, although he'd have a hard time.

He'd struggle with Fury, but most HWs would struggle with a 6' 9" 260lb version of Pernell Whitaker.

Larry's style might not have matched well with Fury as I think you need to be a short, compact and aggressive HW with a top notch inside game to taken down Fury.

[Duran1970]

Version on Pernell Whittaker? Hahahahaha....
I agree with senor pepino
Holmes destroys fury along with all the rest of these so called champions today..

[SenorPipino]

Holmes would be number 1 at best, number 2 at worst.

I'm certain he'd beat Wilder; I'd tip him to beat Joshua, although he'd have a hard time.

He'd struggle with Fury, but most HWs would struggle with a 6' 9" 260lb version of Pernell Whitaker.

Larry's style might not have matched well with Fury as I think you need to be a short, compact and aggressive HW with a top notch inside game to taken down Fury.

Fury would have to land more than his customary 85 punches per 12 rounds to upend Holmes.

Fury's an outstanding defensive fighter? He'd have to be to stand a chance with Holmes. Because Fury would be on the defensive all night.

[Syntax Error]

Holmes would be number 1 at best, number 2 at worst.

I'm certain he'd beat Wilder; I'd tip him to beat Joshua, although he'd have a hard time.

He'd struggle with Fury, but most HWs would struggle with a 6' 9" 260lb version of Pernell Whitaker.

Larry's style might not have matched well with Fury as I think you need to be a short, compact and aggressive HW with a top notch inside game to taken down Fury.

Fury would have to land more than his customary 85 punches per 12 rounds to upend Holmes.

Fury's an outstanding defensive fighter? He'd have to be to stand a chance with Holmes. Because Fury would be on the defensive all night.

Yes, you've got a point to be fair.

Holmes probably beats him, although he struggles as most would, but Fury would need to commit to offense regularly, something he hasn't needed to do too much thus far, but he would against an ATG like Holmes.

[conan_the_cribber]

Larry Holmes was a truly great boxer. I see him having a lot of difficulty with Fury, just because Fury is incredibly agile for someone his size and has a longer reach. I think Fury grinds out a points decision.

I think Holmes has too much ring skills for AJ. I see Holmes getting the decision here, but AJ might have some moments.

I think Holmes easily beats Wilder, who, as always, has a puncher's chance. When Wilder smells blood and starts swinging for the hills, then anything is possible. Definitely the easiest of the fights of the big three.

HOWEVER......

......the fight I'd like to see is Holmes vs Potvekin. Two skill fighters of about the same size. That would be a classic I think.

The rest of the current HW's get ground into dust behind that jab.

[jamamb]

in these hypotheticals so many ppl go with extreme predictions (kicks all their butts etc) even though plenty of great fighters had their not so great showings vs lesser opponents

[oogiebe]

in these hypotheticals so many ppl go with extreme predictions (kicks all their butts etc) even though plenty of great fighters had their not so great showings vs lesser opponents

I don't disagree. So take a shot at it.

[Onetimeonly]

Definitely #1

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

- Fat Lar who used to be skinny never won a fight against a standing champion, 0-5 record.

The sole belt he won was a highly contested split decision with no rematch against Norton who had been elevated by Suliaman, not a legit title.

OK, soft, tubby lads Dewey eyed over their childhood heroes, ie: nothing of any worth to be seen.

To be expected...

[Enlightened-One]

Are we proposing that the modern day equivalent of a cruiserweight that competed using primitive training and diet methods used 37 years ago, who (at the time) had only defeated small cruiserweights, is capable of beating modern day behemoths like Tyson Fury, Deontay Wilder, Anthony Joshua, Dillian Whyte and Luis Ortiz?

The 6’ 3” Larry Holmes’ average weight at his physical prime, for the first 39 bouts of his career, was 207½lbs. Over the equivalent time period, his opponents typically weighed 211½lbs.

The average weight of a top 60 heavyweight fighter is around the 247lbs mark.

Every single top sixty heavyweight fighter rated by BoxRec weighs far more than Larry Holmes' average 207½lb physical prime weight, with the vast majority being taller also.

The 1982 version of Larry Holmes may have been capable of achieving a certain amount of success against the current crop of heavyweights, but being undersized would be a mammoth-sized handicap to overcome, which means he may have struggled to break the top-five rated fighters.

[bigjack]

Holmes kicks everyone's ass.

A solid complete fighter. His jab alone would leave all of them looking like confused statues.

Holmes has forgotten more about boxing then all of today's heavyweights combined are ever going to know.

x2

[bigjack]

Are we proposing that the modern day equivalent of a cruiserweight that competed using primitive training and diet methods used 37 years ago, who (at the time) had only defeated small cruiserweights, is capable of beating modern day behemoths like Tyson Fury, Deontay Wilder, Anthony Joshua, Dillian Whyte and Luis Ortiz?

The 6’ 3” Larry Holmes’ average weight at his physical prime, for the first 39 bouts of his career, was 207½lbs. Over the equivalent time period, his opponents typically weighed 211½lbs.

The average weight of a top 60 heavyweight fighter is around the 247lbs mark.

Every single top sixty heavyweight fighter rated by BoxRec weighs far more than Larry Holmes' average 207½lb physical prime weight, with the vast majority being taller also.

The 1982 version of Larry Holmes may have been capable of achieving a certain amount of success against the current crop of heavyweights, but being undersized would be a mammoth-sized handicap to overcome, which means he may have struggled to break the top-five rated fighters.

Same weight as Wilder but much,much better.

[Enlightened-One]

Are we proposing that the modern day equivalent of a cruiserweight that competed using primitive training and diet methods used 37 years ago, who (at the time) had only defeated small cruiserweights, is capable of beating modern day behemoths like Tyson Fury, Deontay Wilder, Anthony Joshua, Dillian Whyte and Luis Ortiz?

The 6’ 3” Larry Holmes’ average weight at his physical prime, for the first 39 bouts of his career, was 207½lbs. Over the equivalent time period, his opponents typically weighed 211½lbs.

The average weight of a top 60 heavyweight fighter is around the 247lbs mark.

Every single top sixty heavyweight fighter rated by BoxRec weighs far more than Larry Holmes' average 207½lb physical prime weight, with the vast majority being taller also.

The 1982 version of Larry Holmes may have been capable of achieving a certain amount of success against the current crop of heavyweights, but being undersized would be a mammoth-sized handicap to overcome, which means he may have struggled to break the top-five rated fighters.

Same weight as Wilder but much,much better.

Wilder still possesses far superior power and larger physical dimensions than Holmes.

Larry definitely has better skills though. And despite his lack of size, he’d still be very competitive.

It’s also funny that you mention ‘The Bronze Bomber’ being the same size as Larry Holmes, because it wasn’t that long ago that many people aggressively mocked my claim about Wilder’s ability to compete as a cruiserweight, despite Deontay himself subsequently admitting to being able to do this.

How times have changed, eh?

[gilgamesh]

Holmes would be the top dog in the division. I can see the bigger names at the top giving him some trouble in fights, but he'd beat 'em.

[oogiebe]

Holmes would be the top dog in the division. I can see the bigger names at the top giving him some trouble in fights, but he'd beat 'em.

I was in my twenties when Holmes was champ and he's one of my all time favorite fighters, having seen just about every one of his fights from Norton to the end of his career. That said, I have trouble stating he'd be number one today. Top 4/5? Sure. I think he'd have a lot of issues overcoming the huge size discrepancies of today's superheavyweights 1-3. I'm not saying no, but I can't say yes.

[gilgamesh]

Holmes would be the top dog in the division. I can see the bigger names at the top giving him some trouble in fights, but he'd beat 'em.

I was in my twenties when Holmes was champ and he's one of my all time favorite fighters, having seen just about every one of his fights from Norton to the end of his career. That said, I have trouble stating he'd be number one today. Top 4/5? Sure. I think he'd have a lot of issues overcoming the huge size discrepancies of today's superheavyweights 1-3. I'm not saying no, but I can't say yes.

Large size discrepancies indeed, but skill can defeat size, and when you're a 200 plus pound man you're physically strong enough to hurt anybody, even if they got 40 or 50 pounds on ya.

Holmes' greater skill would've won him the day against all of the current guys. Joshua would be the most trouble for him I think, but I think he'd beat him too.

He'd beat Wilder easy. Wilder might shake him with a big shot here, and there, but other than that Holmes would be outboxing the hell out of him every step of the way.

Fury's little dance and showboat, hands behind his back, tongue out routine wouldn't impress Holmes none either.

[oogiebe]

Holmes would be the top dog in the division. I can see the bigger names at the top giving him some trouble in fights, but he'd beat 'em.

I was in my twenties when Holmes was champ and he's one of my all time favorite fighters, having seen just about every one of his fights from Norton to the end of his career. That said, I have trouble stating he'd be number one today. Top 4/5? Sure. I think he'd have a lot of issues overcoming the huge size discrepancies of today's superheavyweights 1-3. I'm not saying no, but I can't say yes.

Large size discrepancies indeed, but skill can defeat size, and when you're a 200 plus pound man you're physically strong enough to hurt anybody, even if they got 40 or 50 pounds on ya.

Holmes' greater skill would've won him the day against all of the current guys. Joshua would be the most trouble for him I think, but I think he'd beat him too.

He'd beat Wilder easy. Wilder might shake him with a big shot here, and there, but other than that Holmes would be outboxing the hell out of him every step of the way.

Fury's little dance and showboat, hands behind his back, tongue out routine wouldn't impress Holmes none either.

Holmes usually had reach advantage and size wasn't an issue for the most part (yea yeah, Cooney). That reach advantage is important to a fighter like Holmes, especially when facing a bigger man. Without it, I don't know how he would be able to get around the overall size and power disadvantages he would be facing. He'd have to fight within his opponent's range more often than he usually would have otherwise.

[lillywhite14]

Holmes would outbox Fury, 6’9 or not. His height helps him against today’s novices but against Larry fvcking Holmes? Really? He’s forgot more about boxing than Fury, Wilder and Joshua will ever know between them.

Someone like Lennox Lewis would really bash Fury up imo. Nothing coming back for Lennox to worry about so he goes after him in a big way.

The heavies are a different breed thesedays. It’s harsh to compare them to the greats of yesteryear. I just can’t see many positives for them in such comparisons.

[oogiebe]

Holmes would outbox Fury, 6’9 or not. His height helps him against today’s novices but against Larry fvcking Holmes? Really? He’s forgot more about boxing than Fury, Wilder and Joshua will ever know between them.

Someone like Lennox Lewis would really bash Fury up imo. Nothing coming back for Lennox to worry about so he goes after him in a big way.

The heavies are a different breed thesedays. It’s harsh to compare them to the greats of yesteryear. I just can’t see many positives for them in such comparisons.

No one loves Holmes more than I do, but you have to be practical. Holmes almost got sparked out by Shavers. Went life and death with Norton...took 13 rounds to take out Cooney. Three examples of fights that made Holmes great, but that he struggled with to some extent. Now compare today's top three with Shavers...with Norton...with Cooney. No one can unequivocally state that Holmes would beat them, much less convincingly.

[Onetimeonly]

Cooney isn't near one of his toughest fights.

[oogiebe]

Cooney isn't near one of his toughest fights.

Didn't say that, just referenced what came to my mind first for comparisons, but thanks for pointing that out.