Tweet
How does the Bob Foster who was stopped by Ali in 8 do against the Larry Holmes who lost to Micheal Spinks the first time around? Can Foster weather the storm and get a win here, or is Holmes to much?
-
-
He loses by late stoppage.. Foster never cut it at H/W.. Infact, he never won a fight in that division.. Although one of the best L/H's that ever lived, he simply never had the build to absorb a H/W punch.. He was subsequently KO'd in all of his fights at heavy..Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
Granted, he took on Doug Jones, Ali & Frazier while all were in their primes, but always gave the impression of a rabbit caught in the headlights.. Where as Spinks fought gamely
& wasn't scared (until he met Tyson lol) But, an ageing Larry would'a still been too tough for Foster.
Saying all this.... I'd still say Foster beats Spinks, but ONLY at L/H -
** Poor Larry was so shot by then that the storm had long turned into a draught.Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
Larry could get a political decision like he did absorbing a beating from the inexperienced Truth Williams with King protecting him. Very similar to how this fight goes. Foster much more experienced than Truth and with a cutting jab would've given Holmes hell at any point in his career.
Maybe early in his career Larry could make a match of it, but after the halfway point of his title run, it's Foster hands down.Comment
-
I'll wait for a few more responses before weighing in on the Foster-Holmes match up. But I do think Larry won a close fight against Williams. I thought the fight was up in the air going into the 15th, but Carl decided to coast and Larry took it. Close, close fight though. and as I've always said, like Witherspoon, Williams deserved a rematch.Originally posted by LondonRingRules View PostComment
-
i think there should be more foster holmes personally, they're much more effective than orphanages.Comment
-
I could see it going the same way as Ali's fight with Foster. Foster held his own for a few rounds, jabbing with Ali and even cutting him. But ultimately Bob lacked the power to bother Ali, whose huge size and strength advantages just wore him down.Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
As noted Foster lost to every good heavyweight he faced, even smallish guys like Jones, Folley and Terrell. He was only ever a tiny heavyweight, whereas Spinks had a walk around weight in the late 190s and always trained down to 175, and later showed he could beat decent heavies.
What with the Marciano comments and the furore over the decision, Spinks never really gets the credit he deserves for the Holmes win. I thought he did a number on Holmes, getting his respect early with a few rights, confusing Holmes with that herky jerky style, out-hustling him, beating him to the punch and even backing him up on occasions. The rematch was a different story though, I thought Holmes won clearly.
But I don't think Foster could replicate Spinks' performance, so my pick is Foster to make it competitive early on, before Holmes wears him down for a mid/late rounds KO.Comment
-
Spinks and foster are completely different type of fighters, larry would stop foster in about 6 rounds, bob couldnt handle folley or terrel so how would he handle holmes?Originally posted by JAB5239 View PostComment
-
That version of Holmes was showing some slippage and was more open to get tagged but I think Holmes would have still had enough to beat Foster at that point because even though Holmes was slipping somewhat, he was far from shot, Holmes would have landed something big and I doubt Foster would have been able to take it.Comment
-
** Well, plenty of responses with the usual breeching of the parameters you set.Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
I rewatched the Truth fight just last month and was shocked at how easily he handled Larry in spite of the inexperience. Yes, he coasted the last round per his trainers advice as I recall, but I wouldn't say Holmes had enough to even take the last round by much if any.
I remember being disappointed with the verdict. Also rewatched the Spoon fight which was closer. I was heavily biased against Spoon as a lazyman's fighter so was happy Larry dodged a bullet, but Larry's rep was as a master boxer, and guys were at least showing up and boxing with him enough to create controversy over decisions to this day.
Which is why me thinks the version of Foster and Holmes you proposed favors Foster who was the only fighter to slice up Ali that I can think off. Larry was also outboxed by Cooney for as long as Gerrie's stamina held, and of course the Norton controversy, a battle weary Norton in his last days.
Berbick's awkward style made him look bad, and we're talking about fighters lacking the experience of Holmes who should've been considered low mileage having gone through the 70s without fighting any "prime" contenders.
Foster was undefeated from 65-74 when he retired save for undefeated Frazier and Ali in his best year ever as a fighter, 1972. Foster won most of those fights by KO.
Love to see a copy of the Folley fight in 65. I've seen the Terrell fight and that was Ernie at his peak, a big fighter in the day against Foster who was being mismanaged by going up against heavy contenders when he was clearly a tall, skinny LH. Be like matching Hearns against middle contenders when he was earning his welter chops.Comment
Comment