Top 10 Heavies from best to worst

[Zmerai Khan]

Was Quarry and Peter better opponents than Seferi?


Your logic btw. It's fantastic.



Finish this sentence please: If Cunningham could find him, Ali .....



And how about this:

mmmmmkay.

Dangerous? Yeah maybe for a fly randomly roaming a boxing ring. How can one asses that Wilder is 'FAR more dangerous' than Frazier? Is it because of Wilder's fantastic skill in punch delivery? Is it because Wilder has shown he can KO opposition in top 30?

What is it that makes you so convinced that Wilder is 'FAR more dangerous'? Idk. Footwork perhaps?

Surprise! The skank's panties drop to the floor when I enter the room. Look, the sassy bitsch shtick is not a turn on. But since I pity you tricks, i'll entertain your advances for a little while.

1) Fury clearly rushed into a dangerous fight with Wilder
When everyone said he needed to slowly re-acclimate, he simply took two exhibition matches before diving into the deep end. Everyone called it lunacy.
Ali, conversely, had sharpened himself against Quarry and Bonavena before facing Frazier. Those were reputable opponents, but Ali's fights to lose. Ali during his hiatus had also kept in fighting shape; clearly not the case with Fury.

I don't even know how this is a point of contention. Seriously you've gotta have fetal alcohol Syndrome or something. No way anyone considers Ali's layoff worse than Fury's, or Fury's rush into a title shot a better career decision than Ali's dialed- in approaching.

2) Frazier NEVER hit like Wilder. I don't expect you to know that because you don't watch Boxing. But everyone who does knows Wilder and Frazier are very different fighters. Wilder is bigger and carries FAR more power. Like a metric schit ton more. He hits even harder and picks his shots better than Foreman, who violently raped Frazier. Oh yeah, Wilder also takes the kind of punches that rocked Frazier without blinking. Not that he walks into punches like Frazier, though.

I love Frazier, but no one would call him more dangerous than Wilder.

The Welterweight analog for Frazier is Armstrong and for Wilder it's Hearns. Armstrong was two fisted and could slip punches; and Hearns could Box very well. But you get the idea.

Well no you don't. You don't know who those guys are. And you've certainly never seen them fight.

[Zmerai Khan]

Was Quarry and Peter better opponents than Seferi?


Your logic btw. It's fantastic.



Finish this sentence please: If Cunningham could find him, Ali .....



And how about this:

mmmmmkay.

Dangerous? Yeah maybe for a fly randomly roaming a boxing ring. How can one asses that Wilder is 'FAR more dangerous' than Frazier? Is it because of Wilder's fantastic skill in punch delivery? Is it because Wilder has shown he can KO opposition in top 30?

What is it that makes you so convinced that Wilder is 'FAR more dangerous'? Idk. Footwork perhaps?

Says the guy who sings the praises of Jack Johnson...

[Granath]

Most Overrated: Larry Holmes

This isn't to say that Holmes wasn't a good fighter but he doesn't belong in anyone's top 10 HW's of all time. He really didn't fight anyone in their prime who was very good. In fact, he purposely ducked the best fighters later in his career. Let's look at some of his "signature" wins.

Shavers in '78 was 33 years old and had just lost to an OLD Ali. We're talking the Ali who lost to Leon Spinks(!) 5 months later. Shavers was well past his peak. More of a name at that point in his career than an actual contender.

He had an exciting fight against Norton a few months later but Norton was already 34 and would get KO'd by Shavers within a year.

I'm not even mentioning Ali in 1980, who was already showing signs of Parkinson's Disease. ****, he couldn't even end it quickly and Ali had to quit on his stool. Tyson at least blasted Holmes out of the ring in 4 when he was 38.

Mike Weaver? He couldn't beat Larry Frazier, never mind Joe Frazier or Larry Holmes.

Renaldo Snipes looked like a good win in '81 until he went 1-4-1 in his next 6.

Gerry Cooney was probably his signature win but let's face it, Cooney was never a top tier fighter. He made his "name" by fighting the same mid-to-late 30s guys that Holmes did. He needed ring time to perfect his skills and never got it. Big puncher but limited skills.

Tim Witherspoon was another good win, except Witherspoon had only 15 fights as a pro and lost a very controversial decision. Did Holmes offer a rematch? Nope, he ran like hell. This is a pattern too. Bonecrusher Smith after 15 fights. Carl Williams after 16. Marvis Frazier after 10. David Bey after 14. None of those guys had the experience to get in the ring with a Champion and frankly none of those guys should have been allowed to.

And those are the good ones. After that it gets ugly. David Bey? Marvis Frazier? Tex Cobb - the fight that made Howard Cosell quit boxing? Lucien Rodriguez? Lorenzo Zanon? What is this, Louis' bum of the month club? He ducked Page, ducked Thomas, Coetzee, the Witherspoon rematch, and Dokes. He claims it was over money but everyone knows he threw away the WBC belt to avoid Page. Might he have won those fights? Yes, and then he'd be a great champion. But he didn't.

Holmes' record is, quite literally, a list of has-beens and never-weres. Maybe that's a smart way to conduct the business of boxing but it doesn't make a great champion.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Ouch!

Poor Lar knocked out by Dwayne Bobick in the Olympic trials with no rematch after Bobick surged to a top 10 contender as tubby Lar languished...

[HOUDINI563]

Holmes exhibited ATG characteristics. He had the fighting heart and chin and will to win that one expects of an ATG. Add to this one of boxing’s all time jabs, great right uppercut, great technical ability/ring smarts and at his best good footwork. His negatives were no left hook to speak of and lack of true KO power. At his best it would take an ATG to beat him.

[Granath]

Holmes exhibited ATG characteristics. He had the fighting heart and chin and will to win that one expects of an ATG. Add to this one of boxing’s all time jabs, great right uppercut, great technical ability/ring smarts and at his best good footwork. His negatives were no left hook to speak of and lack of true KO power. At his best it would take an ATG to beat him.

When was he at his best?

When he barely beat a 34 year old Ken Norton by SD for the title?

When he barely beat a too-young Tim Witherspoon by SD and then ducked the rematch?

Was it against a quite-literally Parkinson's-addled, 38 year old Ali?

Or how about his win over empty-record stiff Gerry Cooney, the same guy who was blasted out by even a soft-puncher like Mike Spinks?

When did he show his best against a top fighter in his prime?

The best thing going for Holmes is his nice record but upon closer examination it's not a great resume. He caught guys very late in their career when he was up-and-coming. And then when he became champion it's even worse - he purposely ducked the best fighters and fought guys who were way before their primes or never even really had one.

Put 'em all in their prime - Ali, Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Holmes, Shavers, maybe even Ron Lyle - and I'm not convinced that Holmes beats even one of them. It took Holmes a SD to to beat a 34 year old Ken Norton. What makes us think he beats a a prime Norton? He barely made it off the canvas against a 33 year old Shavers. Think he makes it out of the round against a 30 year old Shavers? I'm not so sure and those guys are a level below prime Ali, Foreman and Frazier. Heck, I think a prime Ron Lyle and Jerry Quarry give Holmes a run for his money.

Smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors. As I said before I give Holmes a lot of credit for being a very smart businessman. He fought so many hand-picked fighters he might as well have counted his sparring sessions as wins. But the WBC and later the IBF let him get away with it. He made a buttload of money for relatively little risk and almost managed to pull off the travesty of tying the Rock at 49-0. But don't ever confuse clever with great.

[JAB5239]

When was he at his best?

When he barely beat a 34 year old Ken Norton by SD for the title?

When he barely beat a too-young Tim Witherspoon by SD and then ducked the rematch?

Was it against a quite-literally Parkinson's-addled, 38 year old Ali?

Or how about his win over empty-record stiff Gerry Cooney, the same guy who was blasted out by even a soft-puncher like Mike Spinks?

When did he show his best against a top fighter in his prime?

The best thing going for Holmes is his nice record but upon closer examination it's not a great resume. He caught guys very late in their career when he was up-and-coming. And then when he became champion it's even worse - he purposely ducked the best fighters and fought guys who were way before their primes or never even really had one.

Put 'em all in their prime - Ali, Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Holmes, Shavers, maybe even Ron Lyle - and I'm not convinced that Holmes beats even one of them. It took Holmes a SD to to beat a 34 year old Ken Norton. What makes us think he beats a a prime Norton? He barely made it off the canvas against a 33 year old Shavers. Think he makes it out of the round against a 30 year old Shavers? I'm not so sure and those guys are a level below prime Ali, Foreman and Frazier. Heck, I think a prime Ron Lyle and Jerry Quarry give Holmes a run for his money.

Smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors. As I said before I give Holmes a lot of credit for being a very smart businessman. He fought so many hand-picked fighters he might as well have counted his sparring sessions as wins. But the WBC and later the IBF let him get away with it. He made a buttload of money for relatively little risk and almost managed to pull off the travesty of tying the Rock at 49-0. But don't ever confuse clever with great.

I won't bother getting into Holmes torn bicep against Norton or Witherspoon's promotional problems that plagued his career. But I do have a few questions.

How many other champions had 20 title defenses in spite of their competition? I can nitpick every heavyweight champion in history, but how often was this feat accomplished?

How many champions showed the skill level and heart, the sheer focus to defend as many times as Holmes?

And lastly.....if Holmes is such an unworthy candidate to be an ATG than where do you hold and rate Wladimir Klitschko as an ATG?

Im very interested in your own list to back up your personal opinion.

[HOUDINI563]

Your argument is amateurish at best. It’s one that can be formed against any past hwt champion. The mark of an ATG, and very few fighters are ATG, is the ability in toughfight to not quit and walk through adversity to win. Holmes showed this attribute in spades. If Holmes is not an ATG neither is any fighter.

Suggest you grow up and become an objective boxing fan. Keep trying. You’ll get there someday.

[QueensburyRules]

--- ATG don't get kicked out of the HOF the day before their inauguration for being an ass.

ATGs don't waste most of their speech moaning about Big George who is the complete opposite, a truly beloved HOFer.

Lar one of the all time insecure fighters I've ever seen, the first single belt holder in a sea of multi belt holders fighting each other. He didn't think he could beat those young bucks.

[Granath]

I won't bother getting into Holmes torn bicep against Norton or Witherspoon's promotional problems that plagued his career. But I do have a few questions.

How many other champions had 20 title defenses in spite of their competition? I can nitpick every heavyweight champion in history, but how often was this feat accomplished?

How many champions showed the skill level and heart, the sheer focus to defend as many times as Holmes?

And lastly.....if Holmes is such an unworthy candidate to be an ATG than where do you hold and rate Wladimir Klitschko as an ATG?

Im very interested in your own list to back up your personal opinion.

I appreciate the interest and perhaps I'll put mine down here one day.

But this isn't just a matter of look who they fought. There are plenty of all time great champions that didn't have great competition, either because there wasn't anyone out there or those guys were ducking the champ. It happens more now because of the proliferation of belts but still happened even when there weren't multiple belts. Rocky Marciano, who is from my birthplace of Brockton, fought Ezzard Charles at 32, Wolcott at 38, Archie Moore at 38 and Joe Louis at 37. You could say the Rock didn't fight anyone in their prime but there really wasn't anyone around which is why Floyd Patterson was so young when he got it in '56 (Rock retired in '55).

It's also a matter of look who they didn't fight - and why. You mentioned Wlad. Yeah, the quality of his opponents wasn't particularly great but who the heck was out there? The only guy you can say he avoided fighting was his brother. Tyson, Lennox, Bowe, Foreman, Holyfield were all pretty much done before he was champ. The guys he didn't fight his brother already did. Did he actively duck anyone? I can't remember anyone.

However, I was around for Larry Holmes reign (hell, I was watching boxing in Ali's reign). I don't exactly blame Holmes for taking on old Norton - that was the eliminator. The Shavers fights were meh. But once he got into the 80s I've already named about half a dozen fights he should have had and didn't. Everyone back then knew why he gave up the WBC belt and it was to avoid Greg Page. It was common knowledge.

Look at most any other long-time champion. How many fights as Champ did they have against guys with fewer than 20 wins? Wlad, for all his title defenses, had one against 19-0 Jennings. It wasn't until late in his career - after the 3rd Frazier fight sapped Ali of his greatness - that he defend his title anyone under 20 wins (and had 3 total). Joe Louis has only one, an oddball exhibition that the state declared had to be a real fight. Holmes had NINE. That's right, nine title defenses against boxers with fewer than 20 wins all the while ducking guys he could have been fighting.

Holmes was a good fighter with a great jab and a decent chin. That goes a long way. It goes a lot longer when you fight inexperienced boxers who don't yet have the ring time to know how to deal with that kind of opponent. We all knew what we were getting when he was on the TV, a guy who was more interested in hanging on to his belt than he was in fighting worthy opponents.

Does this make him a bad fighter? No. But a closer examination of his opponents doesn't help his case as being one of the great ones.