pick one weight and create an all time 8 man tournament.

[mozfonky]

Holmes was warned not to fight due to chance of permanently injuring his back and possible paralysis if he gets hit wrong frlom his surgery he had BEFORE he fought Spinks. Which is why he laid back the entire time . Holmes CLEARLY wins the second fight,only to novice viewers who would debate that one bc they dont know how to add punch counts for themselves and look at wiki or b.s stats and think they have a valid argument also effective aggression which also counts added up control which is a major facto!!!!!!!

P.s Spinks would still beat the guys in the 70's who Holmes fought which solidifies the years i chosen .

never heard this, don't doubt it though, Holmes and Hagler were guys known to go through with fights even if they were injured. That's the kind of professionalism which we don't see from many other fighters. Of course there is an up and a downside to that. If a fighter doesn't perform, he can be accused of defrauding the public, as Pac and others have been. On the other hand, when a fighter pulls out of a fight, it makes a huge mess of everything.

 

[Uncle Termite]

So you chose 1985 Holmes, because he was heavier and had a bad back. Got it.

No you really dont get it but its cute that you try though,you get n A for effort though in all that you post. Tell us how a younger Lewis is better again without a Manny Stewart than the seasoned late 90's one,id love to hear that one as well ?..lol

 

[Uncle Termite]

1978/1979 Holmes was much better than 1985 Holmes, this isn't bodybuilding.

1985 Holmes loses to Ken Norton ...one could argue that he lost to Carl Williams.

Holmes in the early /late 80's would not have struggled with guys like Shavers ,he practicality beat fought Spinks with one hand and defeated a prime Cooney who wasted Lyle and Norton in the early 80's .Healthy 80's Holmes is the better version we can measures this on opposition.Im not going on years im going when at their best ,show me PROOF 70's Holmes was better than mid 80's one? Lets even say 83/85 Holmes ! You must be a magician if you can however being Holmes didnt fight a live body until 1978 so not onlyare you working with 2 years of show casing these better skills the ONE factor is neeed is an actual superior opponent than he fought in the 80's ...good luck with that one!

 

[Uncle Termite]

never heard this, don't doubt it though, Holmes and Hagler were guys known to go through with fights even if they were injured. That's the kind of professionalism which we don't see from many other fighters. Of course there is an up and a downside to that. If a fighter doesn't perform, he can be accused of defrauding the public, as Pac and others have been. On the other hand, when a fighter pulls out of a fight, it makes a huge mess of everything.

• While training to fight Spinks, Holmes would feel pain shoot through his shoulder whenever he threw a right hand. He was diagnosed with a pinched nerve in his neck. Holmes treated it with heat, massage, and pain pills. When the pain persisted, he saw a specialist. The specialist told him that he had a slipped disc in his fifth vertebra and if he went ahead and fought Spinks, it would be like playing Russian roulette. Throwing a right hand, the specialist said, could cause the disc to rupture his spinal cord, leaving him paralyzed for life. Holmes went to other doctors and was told that he could fight with a pinched nerve. They said the chance that he would be paralyzed was practically nil. However, come fight night, Holmes said he was reluctant to throw his right hand. His trainer, Richie Giachetti, said Holmes "fought scared."

• The fight was televised live on HBO.

 

[clashnat]

Holmes in the early /late 80's would not have struggled with guys like Shavers ,he practicality beat fought Spinks with one hand and defeated a prime Cooney who wasted Lyle and Norton in the early 80's .Healthy 80's Holmes is the better version we can measures this on opposition.Im not going on years im going when at their best ,show me PROOF 70's Holmes was better than mid 80's one? Lets even say 83/85 Holmes ! You must be a magician if you can however being Holmes didnt fight a live body until 1978 so not onlyare you working with 2 years of show casing these better skills the ONE factor is neeed is an actual superior opponent than he fought in the 80's ...good luck with that one!

I can't go into details, but just the way Larry moved around and how he placed and put together his punches circa 1978-1980. His combinations were better, his jab was better.

And he struggled a lot with Cooney, did you even watch that fight? It was a close fight. He also struggled with Witherspoon and Williams.

I think 1978 Holmes gives 1985 Holmes a beating.

But you seem to be very into physical size and big d.... guys.

 

[clashnat]

No you really dont get it but its cute that you try though,you get n A for effort though in all that you post. Tell us how a younger Lewis is better again without a Manny Stewart than the seasoned late 90's one,id love to hear that one as well ?..lol

I agree, that comment about Lewis was nonsense. He wasn't as athletic in the late 90s as he was when he chased Ruddock out of the ring. But he better from a tactical and ring IQ standpoint.

Younger isn't always better.

 

[actjac]

It is interesting how this thread morphed into a heayweight/Larry Holmes topic.

 

[Uncle Termite]

I can't go into details, but just the way Larry moved around and how he placed and put together his punches circa 1978-1980. His combinations were better, his jab was better.

And he struggled a lot with Cooney, did you even watch that fight? It was a close fight. He also struggled with Witherspoon and Williams.

I think 1978 Holmes gives 1985 Holmes a beating.

But you seem to be very into physical size and big d.... guys.

You do realise the general rule of thumb when you go up in weight and better fighters you will generally struggle more correct? Sorry but 210 pound Holmes does not beat out 225 pound Holmes ,For reasons if you broke that down then included his 90's opposition which was better than his 70's or 80's ones your positioning in what you didnt break down falls short.Holmes simply got better with age than his 70's years .Why you guys think just foot work out ranks stronger punching with better ring IQ is beyond me! I also see no significant speed differance either,even in his 40's he had a lazer jab,just ask Mercer and Holyfield.

 

[Seano]

You do realise the general rule of thumb when you go up in weight and better fighters you will generally struggle more correct? .

I don't think thats a "general rule" at all. It depends why guys have gone up in weight, how old they are etc etc etc.

Ray Leonard for example, didn't lose to Norris because he was fighting heavier. He lost because he was older.

Even a guy like Mosley who had much tougher fights at 147-54 than at 135- His best opponent at 135 was probably Holiday or Leija- much lesser guys that he was fighting at 47-54.

 

[nac386]

No you really dont get it but its cute that you try though,you get n A for effort though in all that you post. Tell us how a younger Lewis is better again without a Manny Stewart than the seasoned late 90's one,id love to hear that one as well ?..lol

I agree, that comment about Lewis was nonsense. He wasn't as athletic in the late 90s as he was when he chased Ruddock out of the ring. But he better from a tactical and ring IQ standpoint.

Younger isn't always better.

Lewis had 3 fights with StewarD (with a D) in 1995. He did not start training Lewis in the late 90's (Holyfield fight), Lewis had been on a tear with StewarD for years already.

78 Holmes is better than 85 Holmes, 92 Holyfield is better than 96, and to a lesser extent 96 Lewis is better than 99.

Lewis started beating faded champs in 99-02. That got him attention, but does not make him better.

You can disagree, but can't really call it "nonsense" without sounding extreme.

 

[nac386]

You do realise the general rule of thumb when you go up in weight and better fighters you will generally struggle more correct? Sorry but 210 pound Holmes does not beat out 225 pound Holmes

2016 250-pound Holmes would smash 1985 225-pound Holmes with weight and smarts.

 

[JayElectra]

A lot of people thought Holyfield was a shopworn fighter after the Bowe trilogy. It turned out he still had a lot left (and it should be said that I think he started to fight a little smarter as he aged), but physically he wasn't the same after those Bowe fights. They took something out of him. I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to suggest that Larry Holmes got better as he got fatter, but this is the same poster who insists that Anthony Joshua is an improved version of Lennox Lewis.

 

[clashnat]

Lewis had 3 fights with StewarD (with a D) in 1995. He did not start training Lewis in the late 90's (Holyfield fight), Lewis had been on a tear with StewarD for years already.

78 Holmes is better than 85 Holmes, 92 Holyfield is better than 96, and to a lesser extent 96 Lewis is better than 99.

Lewis started beating faded champs in 99-02. That got him attention, but does not make him better.

You can disagree, but can't really call it "nonsense" without sounding extreme.

The argument was late 90s, not 99-02.

Speaking of Stewart ....Stewart said that Lennox was at his best '97-'99. When he started to come in overweight (around 250 pounds) he started to deteriorate.

 

[nac386]

The argument was late 90s, not 99-02.

Speaking of Stewart ....Stewart said that Lennox was at his best '97-'99. When he started to come in overweight (around 250 pounds) he started to deteriorate.

Not sure who this guy Stewart is.


Prime Lewis, to me, is 96-00. The only difference is he became 4 years older. I would take the younger version over the older version any day.

The other two fighters I mentioned in thst statement, Holyfield and Holmes, were clearly better at a younger age.

You nitpicked 1/3 of my post, and called it "nonsense" based on a 1 year difference in our opinions.

 

[nac386]

I would go with a true murderers row at HW......

Ali 74 vs Holyfield 96

Holmes 85 vs Ruddock 91

Tyson 88 vs W. Klitchko 2010

Lewis late 90's vs V. Klitchko 2004

I think a younger Holyfield, a younger Holmes, and a younger Lewis would make more sense.

Yeah, I stand by that response.

He was closer on Lewis, but when someone says "late 90's Lewis" I immediately think of the Holyfield fight in 99, not 97. Not a big difference, and I never said it was. Definitely nothing nonsensical in that post.

 

[Uncle Termite]

Yeah, I stand by that response.

He was closer on Lewis, but when someone says "late 90's Lewis" I immediately think of the Holyfield fight in 99, not 97. Not a big difference, and I never said it was. Definitely nothing nonsensical in that post.

That's where your wrong 2 years is a time line when in your late age.....as Holyfield I would say hes at a disadvantage at the TIMe of that fight as Lewis was a better aged fighter...holys best years was mid 90's ...Lewis was actually adapting to Stewart still and didn't have to engage as much being hes so huge,which is why Wlad at nearly 40 is fighting for a title still. you don't know who Stewart is? o.k then....................

 

[Uncle Termite]

2016 250-pound Holmes would smash 1985 225-pound Holmes with weight and smarts.

Typical dumb response read the above comment....maybe its good fo us they stopped giving a thumbs up at least for now,since guys on here actually did that for you over me?lol....Maybe that comment is why ...you broke it...lol

 

[Uncle Termite]

Typical dumb response read the above comment....maybe its good fo us they stopped giving a thumbs up at least for now,since guys on here actually did that for you over me?lol....Maybe that comment is why ...you broke it with that nonsense...lol

 

[Uncle Termite]

I don't think thats a "general rule" at all. It depends why guys have gone up in weight, how old they are etc etc etc.

Ray Leonard for example, didn't lose to Norris because he was fighting heavier. He lost because he was older.

Even a guy like Mosley who had much tougher fights at 147-54 than at 135- His best opponent at 135 was probably Holiday or Leija- much lesser guys that he was fighting at 47-54.

I wasn't talking to that class...but if you like take a look at successful other boxers into heavier classes,fighting LEGIT guys. Is it easier? HW its almost certain the higher you go on AVERAGE the harder it is, despite skill.

 

[JayElectra]

That's where your wrong 2 years is a time line when in your late age.....as Holyfield I would say hes at a disadvantage at the TIMe of that fight as Lewis was a better aged fighter...holys best years was mid 90's ...Lewis was actually adapting to Stewart still and didn't have to engage as much being hes so huge,which is why Wlad at nearly 40 is fighting for a title still. you don't know who Stewart is? o.k then....................

lol, Nac, you don't know who "Stewart" is.