Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can John Tate really gave Holmes a tough fight and possibly a loss

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Tate was a poor fighter. He stands no chance vs Holmes. Larry out boxes Tate and then stops him. John had a bad chin and a slow mechanical style.

    Also during that time period the political bodies that ruled boxing were on separate islands. Each was intent to build their own empire. This was the start of the multi champion era where commissions were doing all they could to have as many championship bouts as possible. The more champions the more championship bouts.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by HOUDINI563 View Post
      Tate was a poor fighter. He stands no chance vs Holmes. Larry out boxes Tate and then stops him. John had a bad chin and a slow mechanical style.

      Also during that time period the political bodies that ruled boxing were on separate islands. Each was intent to build their own empire. This was the start of the multi champion era where commissions were doing all they could to have as many championship bouts as possible. The more champions the more championship bouts.
      Here, here!

      Comment


      • #13
        I’m never comfortable about a former pro boxer being labelled a no-good fighter, ‘cause after all, it take some guts to enter a ring. Your health and life is at stake.

        For sure, I can’t see Big John defeat Holmes, but he was a tough guy, and he did beat some household names.

        Returning to the ring less than three months after his brutal KO defeat against Weaver was in itself a brave, but not the wisest, move.

        The evening Tate went from a top contender to a has-been in Montreal, June 20, 1980, I remember very well.
        Tate was KO’d by the unknown Berbick. It was a shocker.
        Ray Leonard lost to Roberto Duran. It was unexpected.
        24-year-old Cleveland Denny lost his life against Gaetan Hart. It was devastating news.

        Denny died on July 6th without ever having regained consciousness.

        Comment


        • #14
          Brave yes. Poor chin yes. Poor fighter yes. Gets brutally stopped by Holmes.....Yes.

          Comment


          • #15
            John Tate was a excellent amateur boxer, that was the Highlight of his boxing days, he didn’t have a signature win, I guess you can say Gerrie Coetzee was a decent win, during the merry Go round of Heavyweight champs at the time. Im not sure where this discussion is except Larry Homes was a much better fighter than someone around here says that’s for sure.
            And that’s that

            Comment


            • #16
              --- Holmesy weren't better than Spoon and Williams and was lucky as hell to get the split over Norton who was a far better fighter in a golden age Holmesy was never a part off.

              Any of the WBA champs could've knocked him off, but King built him up into a huge fight with Cooney...just sayin'...

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post
                Any of the WBA champs could've knocked him off
                There can always be a lucky punch.

                We who actually were there in those ancient times – the late 70s and early 80s – knew we saw a great boxer in “Holmesy” and that he was the undisputed king of this era.

                We also had big hopes on “Spoon”. If he had taken a more serious approach to his profession, which he didn’t until his best years had past, he would have been “Holmesy’s” successor to the throne.

                Comment


                • #18
                  --- Spoon like most WBA champs of the era were feted with drugs and hookers instead of legit purses.

                  The Lar saving grace was a stable, supporting wife that saved him from the derelict vices.

                  Bottomline: every time I saw him fight a Scott, Ledeux, or Marvis, I asked myself why he weren't fighting The WBA champ. His title record of 1-5 against defending champs is why...read it and weep for thee

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post
                    The Lar saving grace was a stable, supporting wife that saved him from the derelict vices.

                    Bottomline: every time I saw him fight a Scott, Ledeux, or Marvis, I asked myself why he weren't fighting The WBA champ. His title record of 1-5 against defending champs is why...read it and weep for thee
                    What's the point in disgracing a fighter (or a human being) who is trying his best?

                    I guess you're entitled to, if you are a 100% perfect man yourself. I believe QueensburyRules belongs to this utterly rare membership.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      --- Ain't disgracing lar, he did that with his weak title run and congenital inferiority complex that made him an ass. He was tossed from the HOF the day before his induction and upon his induction he went on a 20min rant against George.

                      This is a guy so inferior over the celebrity of Butterbean that he challenged him only to get mocked by Bean and nearly KOed. Dempsey, Louis and even Tyson were much gracious pros though Tyson briefly went thru a thug phase.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP