Larry Holmes comments on boxing's current state, Ali, Lewis, and Frazier...

ATTILA the HUN said:
In there primes Holmes would have skooled Lennox.
Click to expand...

Error...
You base that statement on what ??
A 90 kilo heavy (less then 200 lbs) M Spinks beat Holmes twice and M Tyson nearly killed both of them!!!!!!
Thats the truth.

So Lewis would be a quite a bite for him...as big as he is , not to mention that Lewis faced even tougher opponents than Holmes (Tyson, Holyfield, Klitchko, Bowe..)...and actually beat most of them...

Holmes is talking about Ali having easy fights (making them hard??!!) but the truth is HW division was weakest when he (Holmes) fought...I would like to see him fight Foreman, Frazier, Norton, Liston...and ask him then how easy it was ??
 
Holmes already explained his loss to Tyson, citing lack of time to prepare & thus bad conditioning.
 
MeBig said:
Holmes already explained his loss to Tyson, citing lack of time to prepare & thus bad conditioning.
Click to expand...

I'm a huge fan of Holmes the fighter, but when he speaks, he comes off as bitter. He has never accepted any loss other than the Tyson loss and he only accepts that because he can't really deny it.
 
MeBig said:
Holmes already explained his loss to Tyson, citing lack of time to prepare & thus bad conditioning.
Click to expand...

He could have had all the time in the world to prepare but the outcome would have been most likely the same. Loss by KO. His conditioning didn't lose the fight- his chin and heart did.
He collecte his $ and ran.
 
Posted by Aceventura "LOL alot of stupidity in this thread"
Click to expand...

Is that remark directed at me and my remarks about Holmes only being a top 20 HW. Whats so stupid about that statement? Ill qualify it for u than.

Ask yourself would Holmes have beaten any of the below 10 in their prime and not as in the case of Ali and Norton, who he fought when both were 80 years old and not in their primes.

Ali
Frazier
Foreman
Louis
Dempsey
Jack Johnson
Marciano
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Sonny Liston

and would he have beaten these guys in their primes:
Evander Holyfield
Riddick Bowe
Floyd Patterson
Wladimir Klitchko
Ezzard Charles
Ken Norton (imo Norton was shot by time he fought Holmes)
Ron Lyle
Jimmy Young

There are also a number of HW's Ive seen who I have a feeling would have beaten Holmes on their best day but who people may remmember now for their losses later in their careers. I mean Razor Ruddock, Tony Tubbs, and Tony Tucker.

In fact now that I scrutinise Holmes record it makes for a very poor resume against the achievements of the top 10. Prior to beating Norton seemingly the only thing Holmes had done was beat Ernie Shavers. which granted in this day and age would be a great achievement but not worthy of a title shot on its own back in the 70's when you had guys like Quarry,Lyle,Young,Bonavena,Bugner etc as also rans.

He beat a Norton a couple of months shy of his 35th birthday. His early reign has wins over blown up cruiserweights and unexceptional HW's in Ossie Occasio, Alfredo Evangelista,Leon Spinks padding his record.
In fact his whole reign has 2 many people like Tex Cobb, David Bey and Scott Frank.
He also had a knack of giving decent prospects a title shot before they could mature into the shot. Kinda shrew of Larry. Weaver,Witherspoon,Bonecrusher,were all better after Larry beat them.
 
I guess I'm in the minority here but I really see Lewis beating Holmes more times then not. I guess he doesn't consider Ali the greatest ever saying he wasn't even that good. So, obviously he feels like he's no.1 I wonder who is no.2 in larry's book
 
aceventura said:
LOL alot of stupidity in this thread.
Click to expand...

Ya' think?

Christ, just looking at one post I'm "learning" that one inactive and basically retired heavyweight deserved a shot more than Holmes did. Supposedly so did another heavyweight that had been retired for a few years and looking like crap in a comeback attempt (or as Cosell called it during the broadcast "a dismal exhibition at best"). And hey, apparently a "unpopular" and "controversial" decision win over an inexperienced, though somewhat touted prospect of ten pro fights is worthy of a title shot more than Holmes too. Oh, and the best of them all, apparently a guy who had been friggin dead for two years already is more worthy of a title shot than was Holmes.

And yes, Reza, that's directed at you. But at least with your silly way of ranking fighters based on some imaginary matchups I can now say that I have finally found the way to rank Norton over Ali on an all-time basis. Don't need my imagination to answer the question in regards to if Norton could beat Ali either, as reality dictates that I saw him do it all three times they fought, although the second fight was close enough (I had Norton by a point) that that was basically an even fight for me.

I rank Norton as the 23rd best heavyweight of all-time (actually I don't rank him or anybody else anymore, but...), with Ali obviously below that based on your criteria. That is unless you can tell me that fantasy is greater than reality, of course.
 
Ah, take no offense, Reza, as I'm just a senile old **** who has come to dislike mythical matchups a bunch, especially when they are used to determine 'all-time rankings' and things of that nature. To me it just sounds silly using them for such things.

But for the record, I don't see the likes of Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson or even FDR competing with the likes George W. Bush when it comes to modrrn politics, so...ah, nevermind.
 
Sharkey said:
Ah, take no offense, Reza, as I'm just a senile old **** who has come to dislike mythical matchups a bunch, especially when they are used to determine 'all-time rankings' and things of that nature. To me it just sounds silly using them for such things.

But for the record, I don't see the likes of Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson or even FDR competing with the likes George W. Bush when it comes to modrrn politics, so...ah, nevermind.
Click to expand...

thought i smelt something :icon_chee
 
Sounds to me like a bitter old man, for good reason I suppose, probably THE most underrated HW boxer ever.
 
TheBestEver said:
He fought Mike Tyson and I don't care what you say about Larry's age and his lack of activity at that point, it was a total mismatch.
Click to expand...

You could draw the same conclusion about Holmes Vs Ali, but it would be just as stupid in that case.

Fighters have a shelf life in the sport of boxing.
 
TheBestEver said:
He fought Mike Tyson and I don't care what you say about Larry's age and his lack of activity at that point, it was a total mismatch.
Click to expand...
what did Mike say after the win? something along the lines of "I would stand no chance against the prime Larry Homes.'

clearly Mike was being overly gracious, but it was also a recognition that Holmes was old, inactive, injured, and when he was younger would have given mike hell.
 
It's very en vogue to cite Larry as being underrated.

Personally, I'm not one of them. I don't think Holmes is underrated at all. He's a top ten heavyweight (where most everyone rates him) because of how long he held the title, and he was sturdy enough to consistently beat what was in front of him. He doesn't deserve beyond that.
 
brother muzone said:
what did Mike say after the win? something along the lines of "I would stand no chance against the prime Larry Homes.'

clearly Mike was being overly gracious, but it was also a recognition that Holmes was old, inactive, injured, and when he was younger would have given mike hell.
Click to expand...


I'm curious what the exact quote would be, regardless, I wouldn't read too much into Mike's words on that one. He's so bi-polar lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,074
Messages
55,465,846
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top