BoxRec

larry Holmes definately one of the best. But there are so many Holmes defences that ive never seen. can anyone suggest the best place to buy holmes dvds. ?

Holmes was top notch Funso. It's certainly worth revisiting his fights.

funso banjo baby wrote:larry Holmes definately one of the best. But there are so many Holmes defences that ive never seen. can anyone suggest the best place to buy holmes dvds. ?

I have most of Holmes defences in my fight collection so if you are interested in any let me know.... 8)

Probably my favourite Holmes fights are him against Shavers2, Weaver, Williams, cooney, snipes, Berbick and witherspoon... all classic fights...

Holmes is the 2nd best heayweight of alltime .

Go ahead flame me.




But if you are interested in videos there are some you can download with p2p websites like limewire or morpheus.

Grimm, consider yourself torched. As good as he was, I still think he was blessed with a mediocre crop to fight. Arguably there's around 10 fighters of some note that Holmes beat, but fed up or not with the politics, he still should have sought to unify the belts; which he did not do.

Grimm wrote:Holmes is the 2nd best heayweight of alltime .

Go ahead flame me.




But if you are interested in videos there are some you can download with p2p websites like limewire or morpheus.

I agree with Holmes being up there... perhaps Jack Johnson would pip him but Holmes definately belings in the top 3 of all time heavyweights.
Anyone who can say that Holmes opposition was mediocre hasn't really looked at his opposition or seen his world title fights. Holmes opposition is rivalled only by that of Ali's.

as far as holmes not unifying the belts goes...he never needed to. Although there were two titles, wba and wbc, Holmes was always the undisputed champ

funso banjo baby wrote:as far as holmes not unifying the belts goes...he never needed to. Although there were two titles, wba and wbc, Holmes was always the undisputed champ

Thats true, also the promoters wouldnt allow a unification as they knew they could make more money with a second belt... but Holmes was always regarded as the main man.

Says you......

Gotta agree with Funso & Silkov
Holmes was the man who beat the man who beat the man...................

wlvrne wrote:Says you......

Everyone knows that Holmes was the only champ during his reign.

Grimm wrote:

wlvrne wrote:Says you......

Everyone knows that Holmes was the only champ during his reign.

wlvrne is a Holmes hater I'm afraid.

wlvrne wrote:Says you......

Its obvious that you either know very little about Holmes and the era in which he fought or else you are simply blinded by your irrational dislike of Holmes. Did you bet your house on Cooney to beat him or what???... 8)

I was a Larry Holmes hater until he got old; I like old smart fighters better than I like guys that don't fight like Little Red Lopez, like they think they are too good to get hit
Seriously, he was a very good fighter. I dson't know if I'd rate him in the top 3 or not- I've never sat down and made a list- but if not it would be due to the dearth of good fighters around at that time. I would also be very curious to see how he would do with a guy like Pinklon Thomas (but a bit better, its a pretend matchup, right?) that could jab with him, and I don't think he ever demonstrated the infighting skills he'd need to battle the better guys that fought in the Frazier, Dempsey, Marciano mold.
I feel bad for him, though it was his own fault, because while he obviuiously was very confident and all he was basically not a brash fool until hge made the Marciano comment

Larry was a great champ, who near the end ducked a couple of good fighters and lost to a light heavyweight champ.

after he made that marciano comment, did the press and fight fans bash him , i wasnt alive so i didnt know how everyone reacted to the comment.

holmes defintely cooked his own goose with that one, hurt his image.

I remember that controversy. Holmes said out of frustration and i cant really say i blame him too much. Promoters treated him like shit, the press didnt give a shit about him, and the fans wouldnt forgive him for beating the shit out of Ali.
I believe the Holmes would have easily beaten the Rock, but what he said was too disrespectful to a legend like Marciano.

I think the comment was made more out of frustration and exasperation at the press which wanted him to losew and that hadn't talked about anythoing but Marciano's record for a long while. Larry didn't strike me as thwe kind of guy that ran his mouth beyond the demands of his job

As great as Holmes was (he's definitely top 10 and maybe even top 5), I can't put him in the top 3 for this reason alone:

I can't see him winning against a prime Ali, Louis, or Foreman...and if Jack Johnson knew the techniques that are used today I doubt Holmes would stand a chance against him either.

I do think a prime Holmes would defeat Frazier, Marciano, Liston, Tyson (Mike beat an old version of Holmes), and Dempsey.

A prime Holmes would defeat Frazier and Liston every time, Tyson about 5 out of 10 times (Tyson would have caught Holmes in some of the fights), and Marciano and Dempsey probably about half the time too.

I'm sure there are a lot of people who think that Frazier, Marciano, Liston, etc. could have all handled Holmes so come at me if you must.

There are also people that think Holmes would have beat a prime Foreman and maybe even Ali and Louis, so come at me too.

iceman21287 wrote:As great as Holmes was (he's definitely top 10 and maybe even top 5), I can't put him in the top 3 for this reason alone:

I can't see him winning against a prime Ali, Louis, or Foreman...and if Jack Johnson knew the techniques that are used today I doubt Holmes would stand a chance against him either.

I do think a prime Holmes would defeat Frazier, Marciano, Liston, Tyson (Mike beat an old version of Holmes), and Dempsey.

A prime Holmes would defeat Frazier and Liston every time, Tyson about 5 out of 10 times (Tyson would have caught Holmes in some of the fights), and Marciano and Dempsey probably about half the time too.

I'm sure there are a lot of people who think that Frazier, Marciano, Liston, etc. could have all handled Holmes so come at me if you must.

There are also people that think Holmes would have beat a prime Foreman and maybe even Ali and Louis, so come at me too.

I didn't actually mean he would beat Frazier and Liston EVERY time...most of the time, 8 of 10 or so, but not every time...after i read my post again i realized that just sounded stupid.

Holmes frustation was understandable he realised there were many who were pleased that he didn't break Marcianos record. And remember we are talking about a man who made 21 defences of the world title in 7 years being told he was inferior to a fighter who made 6 defences in 4 years!. And I don't say this to put down Marciano but to try and tell it as Holmes would have seen it. And in all honesty I personally think Holmes was in a different league as champion to Rocky... and also most of the other Heavyweight champs, save for Ali, Johnson and Louis...

Grimm wrote:Holmes is the 2nd best heayweight of alltime .

Go ahead flame me.




But if you are interested in videos there are some you can download with p2p websites like limewire or morpheus.

i would disagree, i have him in the top 5 though.. so i dont think you should get flamed for having him at 2. he was a hell of a fighter.

I also have Holmes at #2. Louis at #1.

i dont see how one could say that holmes accomplished more then ali? ali dominated the greatest era of boxing history. the 80's... were not so great.