BoxRec

thoughts?

For a short time he seemed like the best HW out there. KO magazine even ranked him above Holmes after Pinklon beat old man Weaver.

Thomas' mini-era lasted until his next bout when Berbick beat him on points. We'd already seen the best of him by then. Even so I'd rate him as being possibly Tyson's best win, either him or Berbick.

Overall I'd grade him a C+

A C+???

For a fighter who won a legit world title and beat Tillis, Coetzee (IMO anyway), Witherspoon, and Weaver??

Shit the bed, you're a tough judge.

C+ for Mitch Blood Green maybe, but not for guys like Thomas.

I'd give Thomas a B minus as a fighter (let's remember the As are reserved for the truly great fighters)

Pros: Great athleticism, strong jab, very good beard.

Cons: One dimensional, average, open defense, not very skilled (no feinting, use of angles, counter-punching etc.), ok stamina but not note-worthy.

For a late starter for boxing he did very well.

Agree with you Dempsey. Should have been a B or a B+ at best but burnt out too quick for various self inflicted reasons.

For his apparent one dimensional style, which i would agree he had, he sure did a job on Witherspoon, which Holmes couldn't. And his kayo of a still very dangerous Weaver is extremely respectable. Weaver still went on to belt a few good contenders after the Thomas fight.

overhand_right wrote:A C+???

For a fighter who won a legit world title and beat Tillis, Coetzee (IMO anyway), Witherspoon, and Weaver??

Shit the bed, you're a tough judge.

C+ for Mitch Blood Green maybe, but not for guys like Thomas.

Thomas won a title that was taken away from the champion, Holmes, and I think he got a draw with Coetzee (I should really look it up to make sure).

I guess it might sound harsh but I'm rating him in terms of greatness. Anyway, it's all relative... Ask a lot of people to rate fighters out of 10 and they'll only use a small spread of the numbers available... Sorry, i'm babbling...

"taken away from the champion"????

Mate, Holmes VACATED the title, rather fighting two turkeys than take on real challengers Greg Page or his old friend Timmy Witherspoon again.

Witherspoon beat Page for the title (but had he already beaten Holmes anyway? Open to debate), Thomas beat Spoon.

Thomas totally legit, without question.

"Legit without question" ??? Turn it down, Overhand...

Witherspoon offically lost the fight with Holmes whatever our thoughts may or may not be. If Page, Spoon or Thomas had put a little run together as title holders then maybe there could be some argument as to who was the HW that mattered, but as all either became victims of the needle or their waistlines it's hard to argue anything other than Larry still being seen as king of the hill.

Don't get me wrong, Holmes was susceptible at that point. He was carefully picking his fights to get to 50-0 but these guys just weren't convincing enough.

In the end if Thomas wins the title that Holmes vacated rather than tackle either of two dangerous contenders then he is legit.

If Thomas, Page, or Spoon had defended their title against Tex Cobb, Lucien Rodriguez, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier et al they too would have reigned far longer. As it was they always tackled far tougher opposition than Evangelista or Ocasio in their first defenses.

overhand_right wrote:In the end if Thomas wins the title that Holmes vacated rather than tackle either of two dangerous contenders then he is legit.

If Thomas, Page, or Spoon had defended their title against Tex Cobb, Lucien Rodriguez, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier et al they too would have reigned far longer. As it was they always tackled far tougher opposition than Evangelista or Ocasio in their first defenses.

I wholly disagree Overhand.

Holmes ducked Greg Page?? Give me a break . . .Page couldn't put together two solid wins together for his life. Losing to Berbick (who Holmes beat), to Witherspoon (who lost to Holmes in a very close fight on my scorecard), to friggin' David Bey (who then fought a past-it Holmes and got schooled) . . .Page was no Harry Willis waiting for Dempsey.

overhand_right wrote:In the end if Thomas wins the title that Holmes vacated rather than tackle either of two dangerous contenders then he is legit.

If Thomas, Page, or Spoon had defended their title against Tex Cobb, Lucien Rodriguez, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier et al they too would have reigned far longer. As it was they always tackled far tougher opposition than Evangelista or Ocasio in their first defenses.

Crikey, I feel like I'm in a time warp with my old mate from school. We had this exact same argument over 20 years ago.

This is how I see it. If the contenders were as dangerous as you suggest (and to be fair they were a cut above the guys Holmes wnated to face, or should I say they were more proven) then why were they unable to gain any momentum? I just don't think that we can remove Holmes as champion based upon what we consider to be right or wrong match ups.

If we give Thomas the champion tag and then he goes on to lose to Berbick in his next fight whilst Witherspoon makes a successful defence of the other belt are we then going to swap again? It's not a perfect system but unless Holmes loses in the ring, retires or is locked up then he has to be the champ.

Thanks for bringing back some old memories with thsi line of debate. By the way, how high would you rank Thomas?

Very good jab....great chin....natural talent...would be a top 10 today as well. He could beat Oleg and be competitive with the Klitchkos

Thomas was a good fighter but struggled alot against the tougher competition.

His fight with Weaver was a good evenly matched boutand Weaver had him in trouble in round 3 connecting with solid left hooks. This fight was anyones guess until Thomas landed a single right hand which ended the fight; one of the best 1 punch knockouts.

Thomas then struggled with Coetzee and if Coetzee continued to be the aggressor as he did in the first half of the fight he could of won, but instead he let Thomas come to him and Thomas caught up in the second half of the fight scoring that draw. Coetzee doesnt fight well on the back foot but he made the mistake of letting Thomas come to him.

His fight with Tillis however I believe was Thomas at his best and he landed his jab at will against Tillis finishing him off, but the Thomas-Witherspoon fight on the other hand when he won the title was a boring dreadful fight where it looked like neither fighter did any training. His fight with Berbick was again another bore and Berbick easily avoided his jab and beat him on the inside.

Overall rating = B-

dempseyfire wrote: I wholly disagree Overhand.

Holmes ducked Greg Page?? Give me a break . . .Page couldn't put together two solid wins together for his life. Losing to Berbick (who Holmes beat), to Witherspoon (who lost to Holmes in a very close fight on my scorecard), to friggin' David Bey (who then fought a past-it Holmes and got schooled) . . .Page was no Harry Willis waiting for Dempsey.

Mate people regarded Page very highly in 83.. he was very much a live top contender with all the atttributes. Maybe it was inexperience or losing too much weight but he lost legit to Berbick. But he could still punch and he came back to completely bludgeon Quick Tillis and easily beat Snipes, who gave Holmes a real scary fight.

He was the WBC #1 contender but Holmes preferred to fight Scott Frank and Marvis Frazier. That is an indefensible and unexcusable fact. The WBC demanded he take the Page fight so he vacated the belt and took the chump fights.

As it was Page, with severe Don King and money gripes, came in grossly out of shape and was outmauled by Holmes old buddy Spoon. He dropped the weight and IMO got jobbed out of the Bey verdict. Whatever your opinion it was hardly a commanding perfromance by Bey of Pigs.

No avoding the fact Holmes dropped the WBC belt rather than tangle with Page or Spoon. And im a big fan of Holmes, Page, and Spoon so have no agenda/axe to grind.

Ezzard wrote: Crikey, I feel like I'm in a time warp with my old mate from school. We had this exact same argument over 20 years ago.

This is how I see it. If the contenders were as dangerous as you suggest (and to be fair they were a cut above the guys Holmes wnated to face, or should I say they were more proven) then why were they unable to gain any momentum? I just don't think that we can remove Holmes as champion based upon what we consider to be right or wrong match ups.

If we give Thomas the champion tag and then he goes on to lose to Berbick in his next fight whilst Witherspoon makes a successful defence of the other belt are we then going to swap again? It's not a perfect system but unless Holmes loses in the ring, retires or is locked up then he has to be the champ.

Thanks for bringing back some old memories with thsi line of debate. By the way, how high would you rank Thomas?

Ooh, i wanna meet your mate!! Lol.

Im not saying Thomas became The (official) Man (although by 85 The Ring recognized him as such), im just saying you cant dismiss him as a paper champ because the way he came about his title was by legitimate means. It wasnt a John Ruiz or Chris Byrd alphabet machination, he beat Spoon who beat Page, neither of whom Holmes would fight, and vacated his title for easier fights.

As opposed to Lennox Lewis, who disbanded WBA and IBF belts for more difficult and attractive fights.

As for Pinkys ranking, dunno really, I'd give him a B+ but he should have/could have been much more, sans drugs. He doesn't figure in the all times, through his own doing. Unlike Page or Spoon, who likely dont figure in all time rankings because they had to fight under nightmare unending circumstances with Don & Carl King.

I seem to remember the poster The Great John L being a bit of an authority on Thomas so it'll be interesting to see what if he chips in at any point.

He did win the title in a fair enough way. He was a good fighter. Wasn't he a converted lefty? Great jab but with a below par right hand??? He at least came in to the ring in shape. The thing was he seemed to sleepwalk through the Berbick fight and it was game over in terms of the bigger aspirations.

The organisations were best when they were toothless. Holmes should have faced a top contender but he wasn't the first to avoid fighters. Page, Coetzee and Thomas wanted to get him in the ring, and Spoon wanted a rematch. If any of them could have put together a run of wins in any kind of decent fashion they'd have got their wish.

Terence wrote:It is all about perspective, personally I thought that, aside from the right hand from the depths of hell thrown by Snipes, Holmes had Renaldo under control for long periods.
.

Snipes was definitely not under control IMO!!

And the crowd neither, who jeered the stoppage long & lustfully. Yeah, stop Snipes on his feet, but allow Holmes to go on when he gets off the floor and falls face first into the turnbuckle!

Holmes ducked Greg Page??

yep greg page won his eliminater WBC vs renaldo snipes, but holmes gave away his WBC belt RATHER THAN FIGHT PAGE claiming he didnt want to fight page. instead he took on novice marvis frazier. thats ducking.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Holmes ducked Greg Page??

yep greg page won his eliminater WBC vs renaldo snipes, but holmes gave away his WBC belt RATHER THAN FIGHT PAGE claiming he didnt want to fight page. instead he took on novice marvis frazier. thats ducking.

There were other, more political reasons for Holmes giving up the belts.

You are living in dreamland if you think Holmes, who fought Shavers twice, Norton, Tyson, Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith, Cooney, and Mercer was 'afraid' of Greg Page . . . .

Don't be so biased vs Holmes just b/c he said derogatory statements in a state of frustration towards Marciano, you're better than that.

Everytime I think of Pinklon, I think of him getting hit by a bajillion consecutive punches against Tyson. No offense to his accomplishments.

dempseyfire wrote: You are living in dreamland if you think Holmes, who fought Shavers twice, Norton, Tyson, Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith, Cooney, and Mercer was 'afraid' of Greg Page . . . .
.

Dempsey, it is an inescapable fact that Holmes dumped the WBC belt to fight Scott Frank and Marvis Frazier rather than take on Page, who was very hot at that time.

overhand_right wrote:

dempseyfire wrote: You are living in dreamland if you think Holmes, who fought Shavers twice, Norton, Tyson, Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith, Cooney, and Mercer was 'afraid' of Greg Page . . . .
.

Dempsey, it is an inescapable fact that Holmes dumped the WBC belt to fight Scott Frank and Marvis Frazier rather than take on Page, who was very hot at that time.

Do you think Page beats Holmes??

Don't be so biased vs Holmes just b/c he said derogatory statements in a state of frustration towards Marciano, you're better than that.

i actually dont hold that against him at all. holmes made up with marcianos family and that is that. simply heat of the moment thing. why bring marciano up? he has nothing to do with this thread


holmes ducked the WBC MANDATORY CHALLENGER WHO WON the WBC title eliminater. he WON the right to fight holmes, but holmes REFUSED to fight him. page at his peak had the skills to give holmes a very tough fight, especially in 1983.


i could say to you Dont be so biased in favor of holmes, dont let your love for him cloud ur mind on whats reality.


i have a article in 1983 where holmes publiccy admits not wanting to fight page.


holmes from 1983-85 tried to take the easy route to 50-0 instead of trying to unify and take on the top experienced contenders in the divisoon

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
holmes ducked the WBC MANDATORY CHALLENGER WHO WON the WBC title eliminater. he WON the right to fight holmes, but holmes REFUSED to fight him. page at his peak had the skills to give holmes a very tough fight, especially in 1983.


i have a article in 1983 where holmes publiccy admits not wanting to fight page.

Two things:

(1) You have twice claimed you would post this article you keep referring to. We are still waiting.

(2) How was the trip to South America with Rocky50project?

overhand_right wrote:

Terence wrote:It is all about perspective, personally I thought that, aside from the right hand from the depths of hell thrown by Snipes, Holmes had Renaldo under control for long periods.
.

Snipes was definitely not under control IMO!!

And the crowd neither, who jeered the stoppage long & lustfully. Yeah, stop Snipes on his feet, but allow Holmes to go on when he gets off the floor and falls face first into the turnbuckle!

Don King's referee Rudy Ortega gave Holmes close to twenty seconds before he motioned Snipes to come in at Holmes.

At that point Holmes was still walking around the ring with his back to his opponent.

So, Ortega, who had just motioned Snipes to come in, stepped in Snipes' way and stopped him from getting at Holmes and turned Holmes around to face Snipes.

Crooked as hell.

That fight is one of the all time pieces of garbage in the history of boxing

and one of the prime examples of the Don King era.

A geniune Don King special. Boxing turned to GARBAGE.

Ortega's actions in that fight competed with those of the ref in the Ad Wolgast-Joe Rivers fight.

The fight took place in Pittsburgh, and Billy Conn commented for the local papers, "Snipes can't even fight a little bit, and that tells you where Holmes is."

Reynaldo Snipes TKO'd Holmes in that fight.