Was Larry Holmes a boring fighter ?

OMFG. The time Camacho decide to weigh in buck naked. Like ANYONE there really had a hankering to see his 2 inch pecker and non-existent balls. Poet lol I cant believe, he never went through with his cutting his stupid fcuking curl off after the Chavez fight.

If I wanted to tar people with the same brush I would have said ALL posters watch only to see someone KTFO. Instead I said TOO MANY posters: That's a far cry from painting everyone with the same brush. For me, ONE poster like that is too many. As far as I'm concerned if someone is only tuning in for the knockout then they need to take up watching MMA and leave boxing to people who appreciate the whole sport. I have pretty much every Mayweather fight on video and when it comes to watching him fight or having teeth pulled I lean seriously toward tooth extraction. He reminds me of another fighter I detest, Hector "I Wannabe A Track Star" Camacho. I may be 40 but I have no intention of mellowing with age. Gayweather fits, so does Leg-Iron Mike and Julio Cesar Crybaby. It's called SATIRE. Poet :lol1: I agree about Camacho that mofo talks trash and then, when he gets into the ring he does not stop running. I wanted El Chapo to KO him. Never mind DLH,Chavez give him the beating, he deserved.

I'd say it was great for that one round. Holmes was hurt badly, nearly stopped on the ropes and he comes back with a right hand that hurts Witherspoon. For the rest of the round both slug it out in the middle of the ring with little regards for defense. It's not up there with Ali-Frazier, Corrales-Castillo or even Norton-Holmes but it had its moments. Yeah thats fair.

I understand that, but i think people like to go overboard too much, when they see a young contender being competitive with a great champion. Im not trying to speak for everyone else, but i just like to hear the logic people come up with for the opinion they hold. Its not being argumentative it makes for good debate.:boxing: I thought it was a good fight. Great is over the top imo, but we all have our own criteria so, if you think it was a great fight then thats cool. I'd say it was great for that one round. Holmes was hurt badly, nearly stopped on the ropes and he comes back with a right hand that hurts Witherspoon. For the rest of the round they both slug it out in the middle of the ring with little regards for defense. It's not up there with Ali-Frazier, Corrales-Castillo or even Norton-Holmes but it had its moments. A tribute I made to Larry Holmes:

There is no one way to score a fight, people always see close fights differently and there can be big differences in scoring. I can't speak for anyone else. Close or not, it was a great fight in my view. Round 9 (I believe) is one of the best I've ever seen as was round 15 of Norton-Holmes. I understand that, but i think people like to go overboard too much, when they see a young contender being competitive with a great champion. Im not trying to speak for everyone else, but i just like to hear the logic people come up with for the opinion they hold. Its not being argumentative it makes for good debate.:boxing: I thought it was a good fight. Great is over the top imo, but we all have our own criteria so, if you think it was a great fight then thats cool.

Again why do people make fights out to be close that aren't really that close? I mean Witherspoon fought well, but he got outworked most of the fight, and lost the fight clearly from what i saw. Carl Williams pushed him a lot closer than Witherspoon did. Im not saying you are making out to be a close fight BTW There is no one way to score a fight, people always see close fights differently and there can be big differences in scoring. I can't speak for anyone else. Close or not, it was a great fight in my view. Round 9 (I believe) is one of the best I've ever seen as was round 15 of Norton-Holmes.

No way was he boring. First of all, he fought everyone, second, watching the man break people down was a thing of beauty. ven the Cooney fight was nowhere near boring. Too bad he's not around today to clear this whole division out!

It's not obvious at all unless you're one of those who only watch boxing to see someone get KTFO. When I say there are too many fans of that ilk it's an obvious fact and you know it. You have to be dreaming to make a retarded statement like that. Obviously you'r a Gayweather nuthugger. Ps. There are PLENTY of posters on Boxing Scene that feel NSB is infested with too many nuthugging fan-bois to be taken seriously as a legitimate sub-forum unlike Boxing History ect. Poet Im not a Floyd Mayweather fan check me posts. I would however rather watch him than Holmes. Yeah i agree, but usually you take people as you find them. You dont tar them with the same brush, which is what you seem to do apparently. Give a guy a chance before you start with the BS. Gayweather how old are you again ?

I enjoy watching his fights. He had some boring ones as almost all fighters do but he could get into brawls as well, such as the Norton, Shavers, Witherspoon and Weaver fights. Again why do people make fights out to be close that aren't really that close? I mean Witherspoon fought well, but he got outworked most of the fight, and lost the fight clearly from what i saw. Carl Williams pushed him a lot closer than Witherspoon did. Im not saying you are making out to be a close fight BTW

larry holmes is a top 3 heavyweight

I enjoy watching his fights. He had some boring ones as almost all fighters do but he could get into brawls as well, such as the Norton, Shavers, Witherspoon and Weaver fights.

Did I name you? Or doth the Lady protest too much methinks? You have a lot of nerve calling Holmes "boring" and then touting "Run Like A Thief" Gayweather as exciting. Poet Its obvious that your sarcasm was directed at me and other posters on NSB. Just because you didn't say me does not mean you were not talking about me after all this thread was made by me. I did'nt call Larry boring, if you took the time to read my original post you would know that. Mayweather has more skills and variety than Holmes.

classic a 1980's jump kick by a 6'3 man in a tight ass jump suite..you cant write this shit..lol Larry was one of my favorite fighters back in the 80's.. He had the best jab in the business, it was a thing of beauty, the way he made your neck snap back..

WTF are you talking about? Have you ever heard me criticize McCallum? Excuse me? McCallum is an all-time favorite of mine so you don't know what you're talking about. Not a big fan? Junior, I probably had watched more by fights by the time you were BORN then you have in your entire life. Get a clue. Poet Im saying you are generalizing and criticizing people/me for not appreciating the finer things of Boxing, like technical excellence, when i am a big McCallum fan, who himself was technically excellent. No wonder your ignore list is so long the way you carry on. You are older than me that stands to reason you would have seen more fights, but does that make your more of a fan? hell no.

Ironic that Poet should bring up that shit and act like your a moron, because you are not a huge fan. You talk about technical excellence? Im a big Mike McCallum, he was the epitome of technical excellence.

Larry gets a reputation for being boring because far too many fans (including plenty here on this forum) only watch boxing to see someone get KTFO. Sad. Give them technical excellence and they go to sleep. Poet That is complete bullshit. I like watching Pernell Whitaker fight, because he had mad skills. Ive seen nearly all Mayweather fights, and both those guys entertain me more than Larry. I hate it, when people try to put this label on people.

Holmes was a tactical fighter. Surely his biggest fan would concede this? Yet there are people in here giving it the "WTF " like Holmes fought like Gatti and i just said, he is the most boring fighter of all time. If Holmes was entertaining to you fair play, but please dont pretend that you dont know how this criticism of him being a tactical chess players can be labeled at him.

He was usually very boring. I fall asleep when I try to watch Larry Holmes fights. He usually just tried to win decisions, rather than KO his opponents. What about Holmes vs Norton vs Snipes vs Shavers 2 vs Weaver vs Leon Spinks? they were all very good fights.

He was usually very boring. I fall asleep when I try to watch Larry Holmes fights. He usually just tried to win decisions, rather than KO his opponents.

Was Larry Holmes a boring fighter ? Over the past few days ive been watching a few Holmes fights, and while i wouldn't call him boring, he was not what i would consider entertaining either. Holmes had a great fight with Shavers 2,Norton,Carl Williams,Mike Weaver. but most of those fight took time to warm up. The beginning of majority of those fights were tactical affairs. Every fighter has entertaining fights in their career, but on totality was Holmes a boring fighter ? I would be nice and say, he was a tactical more so than boring like Lennox Lewis. I give Holmes credit for being a very good tactical fighter with a HUGE heart , and good skills. That is one thing that cant be questioned about Holmes, he had bags of heart. Spinks fights were tactical bores too imo. I have no idea how the 1st fight made FOTY. Their must have been some lackluster fights that year. Actually the 1st fight wasn't as bad as the second, but it still wasn't FOTY material. The Snipes fight was very good as well and the Leon Spinks fight, The Norton one was one of the best heavyweight of the 70's.