Totally agree with you.I agree man. Holmes was a great boxer, IMO the most underrated World Champion of all time.
Cooney was bigger, stronger, and hit harder than Lennox and Larry used him as a punching bag. Larry's jab was better than Lennox's in every aspect. It was faster, more accurate, harder, timed better, and could be used to dominate, not just control. Holmes had an iron chin and only the hardest of shots dropped him, and 3 of the 4 people that dropped him (Butterbean didn't drop him, that was a BS call) was more to Larry getting careless because he was being completely dominant and he let his guard down. Larry IMO was the smarter of the two. Lennox chose to go toe to toe with a guy like Mercer, and that is just dumb. While Mercer was past his best, it can be argued that he deserved the nod in that fight.Lewis IMO is the best HW since Ali. He'd have knocked Holmes out with the right hand.
Holmes was faster but Lewis was smarter. It could be argued that Lewis jab was just as good as Larrys was too.
Although i have Lewis behind both Liston and Holmes as having the best jab in HW history.
Lewis size, strengh and power would have been to much for Larry.
If you nitch Klitchko they've fought and beaten the same amount of top tier fighters. Plus, Larry was never KOed by B level fighters. Lennox was, twice. And if you want to compare fights compare the fights they had in common. Over the Hill Holmes schooled Mercer. Lennox got a dubious win over him.Tough match-up between two Greats.
Lennox beat the better fighters in his reigns while Larry somehow missed fights with other top Heavyweight in his period.
Was Lennox better than a young Witherspoon and chinny Carl Williams both of whom Holmes struggled with - both had good jabs and technical skills.
Lennox and Larry match-up well but Lennox has the height and reach advantages and also hit harder than Larry.
Lennox on points.
Not sure what being a philly fighter has got to do with Holmes struggling - irrelevant.If you nitch Klitchko they've fought and beaten the same amount of top tier fighters. Plus, Larry was never KOed by B level fighters. Lennox was, twice. And if you want to compare fights compare the fights they had in common. Over the Hill Holmes schooled Mercer. Lennox got a dubious win over him.
Also, Witherspoon was already at the top of his game when he met Holmes. And Holmes struggled cuz Witherspoon is a Philadelphia fighter. What great Philadelphia fighters did Lewis fight? McCall happened to train out of Philly prior to his taking the title from Lewis.![]()
A ridiculous amount of great fighters have struggled with Philly fighters throughout the history of boxing, even Philly fighters not very good. Hell Abraham just looked poorly against one such as this.Not sure what being a philly fighter has got to do with Holmes struggling - irrelevant.
True Larry gave the relatively 'Green' Mercer a boxing lesson while Lennox was matched in a small ring with Mercer (nice trick Don K) and fought the mans fight and won - great fight. Mercer was coming off a close loss to Holyfield.
Comparing victories over common opponents is again abit irrelevant - Is Frank Bruno a better fighter than Holmes because he went 5 rounds with 'Prime' Tyson while Holmes only managed 4 - of course not.
I think you need to look at Larrys title defences and note the names missing; Page, Tubbs, Coetzee, Thomas, Dokes though give him props for beating Weaver, Norton and the over hyped Cooney. Also why did Larry take so long to get in the mix with the Greats of the 70's - slow developer?
The McCall fight was a premature stoppage - the 1st Heavyweight Champion in history stopped on his feet and by a non speaking Mexican referee who was in Don Kings pocket. Lennox got up and beat the count - just the ref was crooked.
Still Lennox record is jam packed with top names - infact he beat Tyson and Larry got knocked senseless by the guy - sill to compare common foes but will chuck that one in for your entertainment.:laugh:
Larry signed to fight Coetzee for June of 1984, but the fight was cancelled in May, 1984. That's why Larry only got 1 title defence in that year. He would have fought Page when he fought Marvis Frazier, but he's a business man and got more money for fighting Frazier than he would have for fighting Page. The others would beat eachother and lose to the "green" fighters. Like Ocasio for example beat Jimmy Young in back to back fights to earn his shot at Larry. Trevor Berbick beat John Tate the year before his fight with Larry. Many of the fights you mentioned had been in negotiations at one point or another. With the different alphabet titles being created and Larry dropping Don King and trying not to deal with him any longer made it extremely difficult for the fights to come off for reasonable money.Not sure what being a philly fighter has got to do with Holmes struggling - irrelevant.
True Larry gave the relatively 'Green' Mercer a boxing lesson while Lennox was matched in a small ring with Mercer (nice trick Don K) and fought the mans fight and won - great fight. Mercer was coming off a close loss to Holyfield.
Comparing victories over common opponents is again abit irrelevant - Is Frank Bruno a better fighter than Holmes because he went 5 rounds with 'Prime' Tyson while Holmes only managed 4 - of course not.
I think you need to look at Larrys title defences and note the names missing; Page, Tubbs, Coetzee, Thomas, Dokes though give him props for beating Weaver, Norton and the over hyped Cooney. Also why did Larry take so long to get in the mix with the Greats of the 70's - slow developer?
The McCall fight was a premature stoppage - the 1st Heavyweight Champion in history stopped on his feet and by a non speaking Mexican referee who was in Don Kings pocket. Lennox got up and beat the count - just the ref was crooked.
Still Lennox record is jam packed with top names - infact he beat Tyson and Larry got knocked senseless by the guy - sill to compare common foes but will chuck that one in for your entertainment.:laugh: