The Larry Holmes' Heavyweight Era: 1978-85

[Nile4000]

Smells of desperation.

Vitali and Wlad would be most of them by simply turning up in shape and being focused. If you can't see that it's a pointless argument.

I don't really understand why it's so important for most of this board to pretend that they weren't all saying the exact same things in the 1980s. I read all the magazines and watched all the fights. Now it's been reinvented.

Witherspoon was KO'd in 1 by a durable bloke with a right hand.
Thomas was beaten on points by an awkward and limited strong man.
Page was beaten by David Bey.

They were all very beatable.

On those nights Thompson would have won all three fights. And they were not 1 in 10 occurrences but de rigueur in 84.

Page was arguably robbed against Bey, but that's matter of opinion.

!

[Tuan_Jim]

You take one bad performance by Witherspoon and twist that into making the whole era bad. And you ignore all the crap performances of recent times.

Doesn't that say everything there is to say about Ezzard and his argument? He's not only willfully ignoring the high profile, extensive and thoroughly well-documented outside-the-ring problems Spoon was suffering ahead of that fight, but also conveniently forgetting that Spoon totally outclassed Bonecrusher over 12 rds in another fight!

It's called trolling. It's worse than a polecateddy or a stevedoc, who are simply imbeciles beyond help. Ezzard should know better but the fact is he's come to a lazy conclusion that doesn't stand up, and is having to skip fights and skewer facts to make his point.

[Ezzard]

I love Tim. Most boxing fans do. He was a super talent. He could also be beaten by extremely limited fighters who turned up on the night with their A-game. That's the only point I'm making.

His outside-the-ring problems should be between him and his therapist.

[Ezzard]

Today's guys are much bigger. Partly this will be more effective 'science' no doubt. But this means they simply cannot be as free-flowing perhaps as guys from the past. Less easy on the eye for sure...but effectiveness is the key here.

In the little experience of sparring I have size makes up for and covers up a lot of shortcomings. The style of these giants is highly effective.

Of course, size isn't everything, I hear you muttering to your wives, but then I enjoy all those posts mocking Tyson Fury for getting dropped by Cunningham ( a Cruiserweight).

Cunningham weighed more than Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, Frazier...

I'm only agitating on this subject because I can't believe the contradictions and double standards.

[Ezzard]

What of that big suet pudding Odlanier Solis?

Here’s a guy who has won a gold medal at the Olympics...and multi-golds at the World Championships.

Now Cuba’s ability to create great amateurs is not in doubt. If you’re a Cuban gold medallist you’re a special fighter with great potential. If you want to argue this point then open another thread and try not to get too emotional.

Solis becomes a pro…he’s unmotivated (remind you of anyone?), has outside the ring issues (remind you of anyone?). He gets bombed out in a round (extenuating circumstances - remind you of anyone?) sleepwalks to defeat to a guy he should have beaten (remind you of anyone?)...

If you think the 1980s was a little better I’m not going to argue. If you think they were leagues ahead you’re over involved…best to get out now before your heart gets broken…

[Ezzard]

Here’s another chap… David Haye…

Has an excellent Cruiserweight career. Moves up to Heavy and is pilloried for his performances. Gets dismissed because of the defeat to Wlad… How many times did I witness 1980s Heavyweights turn up and do an impression of the cult classic ‘The Blob’? Seems to me that non-efforts in the 1980s meant you were a super skilled guy on anti-depressants…but being gun shy today makes you a poor fighter.

[Ezzard]

I stopped talking about trolls when I put down my Fairy Tales...but if it make anyone feel comfortable that's okay with me.

But I honestly don't see much of a difference between Berbick and Povetkin. Both are awkward, limited, tough guys. I'm pretty sure Sam Peter would KO Carl Williams. Tony Thompson would be favourite to beat Bruno and Bonecrusher. Best for best Greg Page would beat Chris Byrd...but on the average night of their careers I'd back Byrd.

There are 100s of times I'd pick the 1980s guys. It just gets overstated here...

[Tuan_Jim]

Of course, size isn't everything, I hear you muttering to your wives, but then I enjoy all those posts mocking Tyson Fury for getting dropped by Cunningham ( a Cruiserweight).

Cunningham weighed more than Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, Frazier...

I think these statements, out of all your recent bizarre posts, sum up just how poor your critical perception is here.

Cunningham weighed more than X great fighters. Again I'm forced to ask with one of your strange statements: What exactly is your point?

Chris Byrd weighs more than a peak Mike Tyson. Does that make him a bigger puncher than Tyson, a stronger fighter?

Tony Thompson weighs more than David Tua or Joe Frazier, and is a heck of a lot bigger. Does that make him a bigger puncher than Tua and Frazier, is he the stronger fighter?

'The style of these giants is highly effective.' Who? Which giants? You've been discussing Solis, Povetkin, Peter, Thompson. You call that 'effective'? Baffling.

[Ezzard]

Of course, size isn't everything, I hear you muttering to your wives, but then I enjoy all those posts mocking Tyson Fury for getting dropped by Cunningham ( a Cruiserweight).

Cunningham weighed more than Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, Frazier...

I think these statements, out of all your recent bizarre posts, sum up just how poor your critical perception is here.

Cunningham weighed more than X great fighters. Again I'm forced to ask with one of your strange statements: What exactly is your point?

Chris Byrd weighs more than a peak Mike Tyson. Does that make him a bigger puncher than Tyson, a stronger fighter?

Tony Thompson weighs more than David Tua or Joe Frazier, and is a heck of a lot bigger. Does that make him a bigger puncher than Tua and Frazier, is he the stronger fighter?

'The style of these giants is highly effective.' Who? Which giants? You've been discussing Solis, Povetkin, Peter, Thompson. You call that 'effective'? Baffling.

It means you can't smirk and point out that Fury got dropped by a Cruiserweight...unless of course you are of the opinion that size does in fact have an impact.

In which case smirk away...

Poor critical perception is better than none at all.

[Tuan_Jim]

And Cunningham/Fury is an irrelevant strand that you yourself introduced into this thread!

'80s heavyweights were more skillful than modern heavyweights.'
'Ah, but Steve Cunningham knocked down Tyson Fury, and let's not forget he is a much bigger man than Jack Dempsey.'
'What are you talking about? I'm saying 80s heavyweights were more skillful than modern heavyweights, regardless of Steve Cunningham, whoever he is.'
'Ah, but remember, Frank Bruno outboxed Bonecrusher, a man that absolutely no one is referring to as one of the skillful 80s heavyweights. That was before Bruno was knocked out for the full count. But prior to that he outboxed him. And yet Bonecrusher went on to lose to Larry Holmes. And let's not forget Bruno has a very modern style. And that Bonecrusher beat Witherspoon on the worst night of his life, who he had also previously lost to, but did Witherspoon have a therapist? That is the question. I'm sorry but we must make a sweeping dismissal of all 80s heavyweights. You are all polishing a turd and calling it a steak, and mixing various other metaphors.'
'Do you even know what you're talking about?'
'Do I know what I'm talking about? . . . Oh . . . (smug look, strokes chin in an attempt to appear enigmatic), poor child, don't you know . . . ?'

[Ezzard]

I did say you'd get emotional... Looks like I was right about that too.

[Ambling Alp II]

You take one bad performance by Witherspoon and twist that into making the whole era bad. And you ignore all the crap performances of recent times.

Doesn't that say everything there is to say about Ezzard and his argument? He's not only willfully ignoring the high profile, extensive and thoroughly well-documented outside-the-ring problems Spoon was suffering ahead of that fight, but also conveniently forgetting that Spoon totally outclassed Bonecrusher over 12 rds in another fight!

It's called trolling. It's worse than a polecateddy or a stevedoc, who are simply imbeciles beyond help. Ezzard should know better but the fact is he's come to a lazy conclusion that doesn't stand up, and is having to skip fights and skewer facts to make his point.

I wouldn't call it trolling, I don't believe Ezzard is trying to upset people. He is just picking and choosing at scraps of evidence that supports his view, and is ignoring points that don't fit his argument. He is hardly alone at doing this.
You know it's bad when people have to resort to the they are bigger now, so they must better defense.
You also know it's bad when they can't even come up with one good fight of this era.

[Tuan_Jim]

I did say you'd get emotional... Looks like I was right about that too.

I'm not getting emotional - I'm pointing out the absurdity of your arguments in this thread.

[Ezzard]

I did say you'd get emotional... Looks like I was right about that too.

I'm not getting emotional - I'm pointing out the absurdity of your arguments in this thread.

In an emotional way, yes.

[Ezzard]

You take one bad performance by Witherspoon and twist that into making the whole era bad. And you ignore all the crap performances of recent times.

Doesn't that say everything there is to say about Ezzard and his argument? He's not only willfully ignoring the high profile, extensive and thoroughly well-documented outside-the-ring problems Spoon was suffering ahead of that fight, but also conveniently forgetting that Spoon totally outclassed Bonecrusher over 12 rds in another fight!

It's called trolling. It's worse than a polecateddy or a stevedoc, who are simply imbeciles beyond help. Ezzard should know better but the fact is he's come to a lazy conclusion that doesn't stand up, and is having to skip fights and skewer facts to make his point.

I wouldn't call it trolling, I don't believe Ezzard is trying to upset people. He is just picking and choosing at scraps of evidence that supports his view, and is ignoring points that don't fit his argument. He is hardly alone at doing this.
You know it's bad when people have to resort to the they are bigger now, so they must better defense.
You also know it's bad when they can't even come up with one good fight of this era.

You’ve offered no evidence, just opinion. I’m offering an opinion with some evidence. As in…these gents today sure are lacking…but not unlike the guys I grew up with… Here are the same shortcomings…what do you think?

Now if you were leaning more towards the 1980s campaigners than I am I would happily discuss. But the problem is you are so far from a reasonable position it’s pointless.

I assumed the question about fights was rhetorical.

[drunkenpiper36]

Renaldo Snipes vs Trevor Berbick was a nice hard fought scrap
Gerrie Coetzee vs Weaver was a war
Holmes vs Witherspoon was good
Holyfield Dokes was a classic Heavyweight war
Ruddock vs Bonecrusher was fun


There were actually several good fights.

[Ambling Alp II]

Those were good fights. I mentioned some other ones earlier. Ezzard (nor anyone else for that matter) has come up with any for the last 12 years. Now he is pretending that he thought the question was rhetorical. Talk about being unreasonable. And he says I'm not being reasonable. Whatever. Would be nice if he would stop ducking the question and name some.

[Nile4000]

Renaldo Snipes vs Trevor Berbick was a nice hard fought scrap
Gerrie Coetzee vs Weaver was a war
Holmes vs Witherspoon was good
Holyfield Dokes was a classic Heavyweight war
Ruddock vs Bonecrusher was fun


There were actually several good fights.

Holyfield and Dokes was classic, but Evander was lucky that Dokes wasn't in his prime, he would've lost.

[drunkenpiper36]

I disagree with that Nile. Dokes was reincarnated version of himself in the late 80's.. The early 80's Dokes was more of a boxer while the later version set down on his punches. He was working under different management, fighting with a different style and bigger build, plus drug free for the first time in years... 1982 Dokes wasn't the right model to beat Holyfield.

[Ezzard]

Those were good fights. I mentioned some other ones earlier. Ezzard (nor anyone else for that matter) has come up with any for the last 12 years. Now he is pretending that he thought the question was rhetorical. Talk about being unreasonable. And he says I'm not being reasonable. Whatever. Would be nice if he would stop ducking the question and name some.

I don't really know how to reply. I'm not going to do something on your whim...I'd find that too annoying.

You can't just ask a question and expect everyone to scuttle off and come back to you on your timetable...and then claim some moral high ground when they get on with their lives.

Yes, plenty of poor fights. And some good ones.

[Ambling Alp II]

You could reply by answering the question that have been asking over and over. Timetable? You have found the time to make replies, yet you can't come up with some good heavyweight fights in this era. If it was a decent era you would have named several right away. You don't because there has not been any good heavyweights for quite a long time. There have not been because the era has been horrible.

No, I don't expect people to be on this site a round the clock ready to answer a question. However, if they are going to keep taking part in the discussion, then yes they answer it. It's common courtesy.
If someone asks me a question, I have the decency to answer it. If I missed a question that was asked of me, let me know. I will answer it.

[Ezzard]

That's not the point. The point is you could name the same ones as me but you won't, so why should I? That's all...

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Could he? I can think of a couple but it's pretty telling that Evander is involved and they aren't exactly high profile.

Holyfield/Savarese
Holyfield/Botha
Haye/Chisora
Fury/Cunningham
Chisora/Fury
Lyakhovich/Quinn

[Ezzard]

Okay... If you're asking me because you're hoping to ascertain what I define as a good fight then fair enough...

I'd add...

The Klitschko defeats were all good fights.

Maskaev-Rahman
Liakhovic-Brewster
Thompson-Price II
Wlad-Peter
Adamek-Arreola
Helenius-Chisora
Banks-Mitchell

[drunkenpiper36]

Brewster vs Meehan - Fun fight to watch. Not much skill involved but a lot of big punches exchanged

Sanders vs Vitali - Another entertaining bout with some dramatic moments

Wlad vs Peter I - Not bad either.

Peter vs Maskaev - Big shots exchanged early on.