BoxRec

I Feel Fine wrote:

yancey wrote: p.s. That segment was after the 1st Spinks fight, and Larry was no doubt pissed by losing a very close decision when he was going for 49-0 to match Marciano. I don't want to get things away from your subject, but do you think Ali would have lost those two Spinks decisions in the exact same situation?? I'll answer my own question.....never.

If Holmes had lost to a 6-0 Leon Spinks, you would be sitting there saying that Ali would have never lost a decision in that situation. So pipe down.

These purloined decisions regarding Ali are becoming redundant...In all the fights he supposedly lost-Ali-Norton ll, Ali-Norton lll,Shavers, Jimmy Young,Spinks ll*, he was never visibly hurt or in serious trouble...At least those who say Hearns was jobbed in his fight with Ray Leonard can point to the two knock downs...

Look at the score card for Holmes-Norton...Holmes won by one point...If he loses we never hear from him again; at least not as a champion....

* I never heard Spinks ll was a controversial decision until recently...Maybe it's blowback...It was so one sided , his trainer, George Benton, abandoned him and the corner in round seven...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:

yancey wrote: p.s. That segment was after the 1st Spinks fight, and Larry was no doubt pissed by losing a very close decision when he was going for 49-0 to match Marciano. I don't want to get things away from your subject, but do you think Ali would have lost those two Spinks decisions in the exact same situation?? I'll answer my own question.....never.

If Holmes had lost to a 6-0 Leon Spinks, you would be sitting there saying that Ali would have never lost a decision in that situation. So pipe down.

These purloined decisions regarding Ali are becoming redundant...In all the fights he supposedly lost-Ali-Norton ll, Ali-Norton lll,Shavers, Jimmy Young,Spinks ll*, he was never visibly hurt or in serious trouble...At least those who say Hearns was jobbed in his fight with Ray Leonard can point to the two knock downs...

Look at the score card for Holmes-Norton...Holmes won by one point...If he loses we never hear from him again; at least not as a champion....

* I never heard Spinks ll was a controversial decision until recently...Maybe it's blowback...It was so one sided , his trainer, George Benton, abandoned him and the corner in round seven...

"Never hurt or in serious trouble" against Shavers?

Yeah, right.

Ali was great, but he was also the clear recipient of gift decisions.

yancey wrote:Ali was great, but he was also the clear recipient of gift decisions.

No more than Holmes.

Marciano got everything out of his talent that he could, which is the definition of a winner, but he is definitely overrated.

He came along at the right time, faced a very much over the hill Louis and Charles, who both would have handled him easily in their primes. His skills were rudimentary at best, and he looked mostly like a club fighter. His fight with dough boy Cockell is downright embarrassing for the wild, awkward swings and inability to put his man away after hitting him with everything but the kitchen sink. Freaking embarrassing.

This observation is very interesting.

I agree that Louis was far over the hill and I used to say Charles was far over the hill, but I retract that statement now. He was past his best, but not nearly as much as Louis.

His worst fight was not the Cockell fight but the Lee Savold fight. He looks like an amateurish brute in that bout. I think I read here that he was sick for that fight or there was some other factor. He definitely polished himself more by the time he won the title.

Charles would have always gave Marciano trouble, but to say he'd handle Marciano easily in his prime is a bit of a stretch. Charles was not a natural heavyweight and Marciano was very durable with a big punch. Could have gone either way with each at their best.

This coming from a big Charles fan and a Marciano detractor, so I'm giving a very unbiased opinion.

evndrbsn wrote:I agree that Louis was far over the hill and I used to say Charles was far over the hill, but I retract that statement now. He was past his best, but not nearly as much as Louis.

His worst fight was not the Cockell fight but the Lee Savold fight. He looks like an amateurish brute in that bout. I think I read here that he was sick for that fight or there was some other factor. He definitely polished himself more by the time he won the title.

Charles would have always gave Marciano trouble, but to say he'd handle Marciano easily in his prime is a bit of a stretch. Charles was not a natural heavyweight and Marciano was very durable with a big punch. Could have gone either way with each at their best.

This coming from a big Charles fan and a Marciano detractor, so I'm giving a very unbiased opinion.

I have never seen a fight like the Cockell fight...Hitting a guy when he's down, rabbit punching, falling through the ring, et cetera...

I think Louis and Charles were still decent fighters. I think Charles rolled back the years for one last time in the 1st fight... Even so, I agree that both would have beaten him a few years previously. If Charles had got the decision in the 4th Walcott fight (and many say he should have done) then it's debatable whether Marciano would have won the title off him.

Rocky still has many great attributes. He's still a fantastic fighter but he's not one of the elite HWs.

Indeed a Superb HW, but i only seem him getting a humiliating beating against the likes of Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Liston, PRIME Louis, Tyson, Lewis, Holyfield and so on.

bull wrote:49-0 /43 ko/

Joe Calzaghe

won 45 (KO 32) + lost 0

Floyd Mayweather

won 39 (KO 25) + lost 0

I wonder if Calazaghe retires undefeated and Pretty Boy Floyd never comes out of retirement if boxing fans fifty years hence will say those gentlemen were the GOAT...

First off, it wasn't an elbow that KO'd Louis... If none of you cana ctually get the whole fight, then just go onto youtube and type in Marciano Knockouts or Rocky vs Louis or some thing like that and it will show you the punch.

As for Holmes, he always thought highly of himself... In my opinion he wasn't as good as he thought he was... I always find that back a half-centiry ago, the fighters were a little more humble than they are "trash-talking" today...

Nah, I think Marciano would KO Holmes...

Then, of course, this brings into question the idea that Holmes was "the bigger man" theory.... But just look at max Baer vs Primo Carnera... For all intensive purposes, Carnera should ahve won and overpowered Baer because he was the "bigger man"...

Holmes just liked to think that he could beta Marciano... At that point I think he wa sjust smarming at upest with himself that he couldn't climb to 49-0 and match Rockys record.

Crease wrote:First off, it wasn't an elbow that KO'd Louis... If none of you cana ctually get the whole fight, then just go onto youtube and type in Marciano Knockouts or Rocky vs Louis or some thing like that and it will show you the punch.

As for Holmes, he always thought highly of himself... In my opinion he wasn't as good as he thought he was... I always find that back a half-centiry ago, the fighters were a little more humble than they are "trash-talking" today...

Nah, I think Marciano would KO Holmes...

Then, of course, this brings into question the idea that Holmes was "the bigger man" theory.... But just look at max Baer vs Primo Carnera... For all intensive purposes, Carnera should ahve won and overpowered Baer because he was the "bigger man"...

Holmes just liked to think that he could beta Marciano... At that point I think he wa sjust smarming at upest with himself that he couldn't climb to 49-0 and match Rockys record.

You need to factor in the talent difference between Holmes and Carnera I suppose...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:
* I never heard Spinks ll was a controversial decision until recently...Maybe it's blowback...It was so one sided , his trainer, George Benton, abandoned him and the corner in round seven...

Baldfaced lie worthy of Thomas Hauser.

Benton left the ring because, "It was a fix."

Get ahold of Benton and he will be happy to repeat that.

granberry wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:
* I never heard Spinks ll was a controversial decision until recently...Maybe it's blowback...It was so one sided , his trainer, George Benton, abandoned him and the corner in round seven...

Baldfaced lie worthy of Thomas Hauser.

Benton left the ring because, "It was a fix."

Get ahold of Benton and he will be happy to repeat that.

A tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.


Macbeth, 5. 5.


Spinks was beat by a shot Ali...A shot Ali wouldn't have needed a rematch if he trained for more than six days...