Best HW of the 80s - Tyson or Holmes?

[Slimey Limey]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;7187429]

Sorry son, a robbery is when one fighter CLEARLY wins and doesn't get the decision. Please, name a fight where Holmes was CLEARLY beaten only to get the nod. Every champion has had close calls from Ali to Louis to Marciano etc. AM I WRONG?

Barely or clearly is the same thing as a win. The point is that Holmes had too many fights were he left doubts on wether he actually won without a doubt. That deminishes his so called greatness and leaves him way outside the top 5 ATGs. That is of cource not uncluding you, since you wouldn't know what objective means if I slapped it across your face with both hands, mate.

And who's opinion is valued more amongst other fans and historians? Hint......its not you.

There are none in this website. Unless you think your fellow Louis arse lickers qualify as historians And I know i'm not very loved by them, mate.

Again, out of 20 defenses, how many occasions was it?

They were already mentioned in this thread, old man. I know you're slow and everything has to be repeated to you so you understand what's going on, but I'll let you do the work. It's good for you.

Look, you're a clown. I know it, you know it, everybody else who posts here knows it. We're still waiting for you to name all the heavyweight champions who faced better comp than Louis and were more dominant. Lol, cats had your tongue on that one for months now. I'll tell you what though, pick a subject to debate and I'll happily embarrass you as always.

That one stung didn't it mate? You went completely off topic on an emotional rant here. I think I did my job yet again. I broke you down.
Next time don't debate me like a woman. Think with your brain(as slow as it is with your age, but still) and not your feelings.

Thats right, I use to "beeez dat dude". Never turned pro, but was in the ring with plenty of them. How bout you armchair, what have you ever done?

Ah, now we know that this lad isn't just a tough guy on the internet, but he was a real fighter ladies and gentleman. Educate us more on your boxing legacy mate, we want to know what a killer you were in the ring.

[Slimey Limey]

Why do you set out your responses like this? It just complicates matters and takes far more time and effort just to organise your qoute to respond to it.

Him and Poet not only debate like women, but they need to have their letters in a pretty color to make their words somehow more significant haha.

[GJC]

Don't think you can give thier fight in 88 much weight in the argument although I would have favoured Tyson at any time from 85 ish as Holmes was slipping. Few have mentioned that Tyson gets the nod for the 80's and Holmes ranks better all time, that seems pretty fair to me. Prime for prime I'd fancy Holmes in a match up overall.
As for the close fights of Holmes, I think Witherspoon could count himself unlucky but I would have given Holmes the nod over Norton and Williams. Bonecrusher I didn't really see as close at all.

[JAB5239]

Barely or clearly is the same thing as a win. The point is that Holmes had too many fights were he left doubts on wether he actually won without a doubt. That deminishes his so called greatness and leaves him way outside the top 5 ATGs. That is of cource not uncluding you, since you wouldn't know what objective means if I slapped it across your face with both hands, mate.

Lots of great fighters have had close fights throughout their careers yet you choose to single out fighters you don't like personally. Imagine you having the nerve to say Im not objective. Pathetic!

There are none in this website. Unless you think your fellow Louis arse lickers qualify as historians And I know i'm not very loved by them, mate.

There are plenty of them here, they just don't agree with you. Neither do these more universally known historians.


Bert Sugar, 1991

1.

Jack Dempsey
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Muhammad Ali
4.

Jack Johnson
5.

Gene Tunney
6.

Rocky Marciano
7.

Joe Frazier
8.

Larry Holmes
9.

Sonny Liston
10.

Mike Tyson


Arthur Harris, 1992 (Nov 1992 Boxing Scene)

1.

Muhammad Ali
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Jack Dempsey
4.

Jack Johnson
5.

Gene Tunney
6.

Rocky Marciano
7.

Larry Holmes
8.

Jersey Joe Walcott
9.

Joe Frazier
10.

Sonny Liston


Nigel Collins, 1997

1.

Muhammad Ali
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Evander Holyfield
4.

Larry Holmes
5.

George Foreman
6.

Jack Johnson
7.

Rocky Marciano
8.

Joe Frazier
9.

Jack Dempsey
10.

Sonny Liston


Herbert Goldman, 1997

1.

Muhammad Ali
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Sonny Liston
4.

Mike Tyson
5.

Larry Holmes
6.

Jack Johnson
7.

Jack Dempsey
8.

George Foreman
9.

Rocky Marciano
10.

Joe Frazier


Steve Farhood, 1997

1.

Muhammad Ali
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Jack Johnson
4.

Larry Holmes
5.

Rocky Marciano
6.

Jack Dempsey
7.

Jim Jeffries
8.

Evander Holyfield
9.

Mike Tyson
10.

George Foreman


BBC Sports, 2004

1.

Muhammad Ali
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Jack Johnson
4.

Larry Holmes
5.

Jack Dempsey
6.

Rocky Marciano
7.

Lennox Lewis
8.

Mike Tyson
9.

George Foreman
10.

Evander Holyfield


IBRO Member Poll, 2005

1.

Joe Louis
2.

Muhammad Ali
3.

Jack Johnson
4.

Jack Dempsey
5.

Rocky Marciano
6.

Larry Holmes
7.

James Jeffries
8.

George Foreman
9.

Sonny Liston
10.

Joe Frazier


ESPN, 2007

1.

Joe Louis
2.

Muhammad Ali
3.

Jack Dempsey
4.

Jack Johnson
5.

Gene Tunney
6.

Rocky Marciano
7.

Ezzard Charles
8.

George Foreman
9.

Joe Frazier
10.

Larry Holmes


Richard O'Brien (SI Senior Editor) 2009

1.

Muhammad Ali
2.

Joe Louis
3.

Sonny Liston
4.

Larry Holmes
5.

Jack Johnson
6.

Jack Dempsey
7.

George Foreman
8.

Joe Frazier
9.

Rocky Marciano
10.

Lennox Lewis

That one stung didn't it mate? You went completely off topic on an emotional rant here. I think I did my job yet again. I broke you down.
Next time don't debate me like a woman. Think with your brain(as slow as it is with your age, but still) and not your feelings.

Nah, Im not going off topic. Just proving a point that you make all sorts of crazy claims yet refuse to back them up. Its a fact, thats why I've made you famous bu putting you in my sig.

Ah, now we know that this lad isn't just a tough guy on the internet, but he was a real fighter ladies and gentleman. Educate us more on your boxing legacy mate, we want to know what a killer you were in the ring.

If I had any respect for you I'd tell you everything. I don't though so I won't. Anyone else who wants to know my background in this sport is welcome to PM me. If I know and respect you, no prob. If I don't I'll politely decline until I feel more comfortable talking to you about my personal life.

[Slimey Limey]

Lots of great fighters have had close fights throughout their careers yet you choose to single out fighters you don't like personally. Imagine you having the nerve to say Im not objective. Pathetic!

That's exactly why I am objective. I bring balance to the forum.
You know why I single out those 2? Because nobody else has/had the bollocks to say it about them. It has become blasphemy to say something negative about them. So the site needs someone like me.

There are plenty of them here, they just don't agree with you. Neither do these more universally known historians.

Name me the boxing historians on this website.

And thank you for proving me earlier point. I already said that the myth about Gay Robinson was started by the old timers, and kept alive by the new generation because they'll eat anything up.

Nah, Im not going off topic. Just proving a point that you make all sorts of crazy claims yet refuse to back them up. Its a fact, thats why I've made you famous bu putting you in my sig.

Read that part again. It had nothing to do with the topic and you talked about things in the past as well. You became too emotional, and proved it by reporting me today because of this thread. I didn't know you were this sensitive mate.

If I had any respect for you I'd tell you everything. I don't though so I won't. Anyone else who wants to know my background in this sport is welcome to PM me. If I know and respect you, no prob. If I don't I'll politely decline until I feel more comfortable talking to you about my personal life.

Then why did you bring it up chap? This is the same lad that claimed I didn't want to talk about something even though I brought it up, yet you're blatantly doing the same thing here.
So another tough guy attempt failed miserably here mate.

[JAB5239]

That's exactly why I am objective. I bring balance to the forum.
You know why I single out those 2? Because nobody else has/had the bollocks to say it about them. It has become blasphemy to say something negative about them. So the site needs someone like me.

Speaking the truth is fine. Trying to force illogical opinions and flat out lying is what you do, and its been proven time and time again. This site would be better off if you weren't here, but its nice to have something to kick around from time to time.

Name me the boxing historians on this website.

Im not going to make a list of the better one on this board because I don't want to insult anyone by forgetting them. Bottom line though, everybody who studies boxing history is a boxing historian. Some are just more knowledgeable than others.

And thank you for proving me earlier point. I already said that the myth about Gay Robinson was started by the old timers, and kept alive by the new generation because they'll eat anything up.

Lol, so its being KEPT ALIVE by people who will eat anything up? Why can't it be that the majority of people just see the same things in him and his career?

Read that part again. It had nothing to do with the topic and you talked about things in the past as well. You became too emotional, and proved it by reporting me today because of this thread. I didn't know you were this sensitive mate.

Look at you, still trying to to do anything to avoid explaining your reasoning. Sad.

Then why did you bring it up chap? This is the same lad that claimed I didn't want to talk about something even though I brought it up, yet you're blatantly doing the same thing here.
So another tough guy attempt failed miserably here mate.

I never brought me up, you did.

[Slimey Limey]

Speaking the truth is fine. Trying to force illogical opinions and flat out lying is what you do, and its been proven time and time again. This site would be better off if you weren't here, but its nice to have something to kick around from time to time.

"Forcing" now? If anything you lads are the ones trying to force the same nuthugging ideals to everybody else who doesn't kiss certain fighters' arses. Don't worry, I won't be following you around trying to change your mind mate. Don't get paranoid like thegreat****** now.

Im not going to make a list of the better one on this board because I don't want to insult anyone by forgetting them. Bottom line though, everybody who studies boxing history is a boxing historian. Some are just more knowledgeable than others.

I will ask again: Name me the boxing historians on this website.
Don't refuse. You're always trying to rag on me for not trying to waste me time answering your petty questions.

Lol, so its being KEPT ALIVE by people who will eat anything up? Why can't it be that the majority of people just see the same things in him and his career?

The majority of people haven't even seen his fights. They'll just buy into the hype and be too affraid to disagree with you Hyenas.

Look at you, still trying to to do anything to avoid explaining your reasoning. Sad.

How about you EXPLAIN to me who the boxing historians on this website are, mate? Or how much of a killer you were as a fighter. Or why Gay is better than Louis. Hypocrisy much.

I never brought me up, you did.

You, the TOUGH GUY, was the one that brought up the fact that you beeez a fighter for real, trying to make up for your insecurities.

[DeepSleep]

I think Tyson did more in the eighties than Holmes did. I would fancy prime Holmes over prime Tyson though. I agree with Poet's reasoning that you can't put too much weight into Holmes loss to Tyson just like you can't put too much weight into Tyson's loss to Lennox.

[crold1]

No, they were seen as close fights. He beat both Witherspoon and William, in my opinion, and the Norton fight could have been a draw. The judges however saw fit to give the nod to Holmes in all and thats all that matters. "The majoprity of people", lol, what a joke! The majority of people hated Holmes and WANTED him to lose. Sorry but that doesn't just make it so. And both your opinion and mine are meaningless here since its a FACT he did win those fights.

Funny thing with Norton was that he won the 15th and I still think he decisively lost. Holmes won most of the first ten rounds as it took Norton a while to really get into it and had Norton hurt bad in the 13th. Great, great fight though.

[Obama]

If we just evaluate the fighters career in the 80s and the 80s alone, then I have to go with Mike Tyson. Overall career, Larry Holmes.