--- Spltting of titles in the Lar era, so it fell on kid genius Tyson to unify the belts in the 80s.
You next, but you've been derilect and missing in action thus far...
My friend, you're ignoring the fact that it was nearly impossible to make a unification fight at that time. It took a massive draw like Tyson to do so. You're also ignoring the fact that historians and trainers all rank Holmes as one of the greatest heavyweights ever.
My friend, you're ignoring the fact that it was nearly impossible to make a unification fight at that time. It took a massive draw like Tyson to do so. You're also ignoring the fact that historians and trainers all rank Holmes as one of the greatest heavyweights ever.
Not to mention the fact that Larry Holmes was still lineal champion during the first half of the '80s.
I remember watching Tate against Coetzee in that ice rink in South Africa(ring was super slippery) and the first 12 rounds with Weaver and thinking that Tate might be able to box with Holmes. Later in that fight and after the thought never entered my mind. Back then the rap on Tate was his chin but I always thought it was his endurance. Something he couldn't do without against Holmes.
--- It's inarguable that fat Lar wouldn't go near a WBA champ during his run for good reason.
The poor dear has something like a 1-5 title record against standing champs. The only one he beat was norton who had been appointed the WBC title after his eliminator w/ Young. Wouldn't touch young either.
While Holmes was champ he defeated three fighters that went on to win the WBA title while he was still champion.
He might have fought Young but Young was upset by Ocasio. Holmes defended against Ocasio soon after.
Comment