Zelley wrote:1/ JAMES J CORBETT
The pioneer of good boxing in heavyweight fights.
His victory over the one-time bare knuckle fighter
JOHN L. SULLIVAN took boxing from back rooms, bars,
and barges on some river bank to a new beginning where
ring skills were necessary to win bouts.
2./BOB FITZSIMMONS
The first triple champion who opened the door for future greats
like HENRY ARMSTRONG.
Greatness is an interesting word, some associate it with ALI or
wrestler Gorgeous George or any other fighter that could claim
greatness. But, real greatness is the ability to change the future
for the better and CORBETT and FIZSIMMONS are logical pioneers
for heavyweight champions. Not sure the re-naming of an old trick
of laying back on the ropes and blocking punches is high on the great
moments in boxing history, but then greatness is just a word with so
many yardsticks. The trick is to decide first on the yardstick to measure
greatness.
Totally agree with all of the above assessments, and comments on greatness. Its impossible to literally pitch different era boxers against each other, even the self proclaiming Greatest admitted in the end that the best you can ever really say was that you were the greatest of your/their own time.
In that Larry Holmes and George Foreman kind of share a "their time" I can never see a prime Foreman beating a prime Holmes.
Gene Tunney, who so admired James J Corbett, to me always seems to be the missing link between the ground breaking Corbett and the modern day great Heavyweights of which Louis stands as the torchbearer. I like to think that Tunney would have found a way to beat all but Louis and Ali despite the shear size and power difference that the super Heavy’s of Holmes, Foreman and Frazier brought to bear.
Foreman has no chance with Holmes, but Tunney may beat him?
Goodnight, Irene wrote:I can certainly sympathise with that.
Id like to imagine an awful lot of people beating up Boxings all-time douche bag, Larry Holmes D
Last time I saw Holmes interviewed I thought the all time douche bag had actually mellowed somewhat and become almost, well, humble. Though I immediately realise how oxymoronic yoking the words Holmes + Humble is. DD
Jake Hughes wrote:Its impossible to literally pitch different era boxers against each other, even the self proclaiming Greatest admitted in the end that the best you can ever really say was that you were the greatest of your/their own time.
Jake Hughes wrote:Its impossible to literally pitch different era boxers against each other, even the self proclaiming Greatest admitted in the end that the best you can ever really say was that you were the greatest of your/their own time.
I agree 100% with this statement.
So Larry Holmes cant be compared with someone like Lennox Lewis?
Jake Hughes wrote:Its impossible to literally pitch different era boxers against each other, even the self proclaiming Greatest admitted in the end that the best you can ever really say was that you were the greatest of your/their own time.
I agree 100% with this statement.
So Larry Holmes cant be compared with someone like Lennox Lewis?
Jake Hughes wrote:Its impossible to literally pitch different era boxers against each other, even the self proclaiming Greatest admitted in the end that the best you can ever really say was that you were the greatest of your/their own time.
I agree 100% with this statement.
Me too.
But…
Doesn’t mean you can’t try. Sports fans will always do it. And it’s one of my favourite pastimes.
When anyone tries to compare fighters of different eras the comparison/analysis is more about the era in which the comparison is being made than it is about either of the fighters.
D