Timing!

Some fighters just have no luck. Larry Holmes IMO 1 of the greatest heavyweights ever in his prime sort of emerged into a ghost town. With the exception of Cooney and Shavers I struggle to name his note worthy opponants. Had he emerged say 10 years earlier in the carnival of heavyweight boxing back in the late 60's/70's, the deepest era in history, how do you think he would have mixed with the best.

I think the timing of Larry's career suited him and did him a few favours, in fairness.

I have nothing but the utmost respect for Holmes as a fighter - he was a magnificent one. But had his title days come a decade earlier (so basically, 1968 to 1975 rather than 1978 to 1985) I think he may have to settle for the bronze medal of the era, rather than being unquestionally the best, which he was in his own time.

I can't quite find it in me to forget that Norton, who himself was 'only' the fourth Heavyweight of the aforementioned golden era, gave Larry every last bit of trouble he could handle, and nor can I ignore the fact that Holmes shipped a lot of punishment in that fight, too; he wouldn't have lasted five rounds fighting like that against a 1973 / 1974 version of Foreman, even allowing for Larry's incredible powers of recuperation, indomitable courage and will to win. Lest we forget, also, that Norton was perhaps a little shopworn by this time, too.

Quite rightly lauded as one of the top half-dozen Heavyweights on career accomplishments, though, and his performances against the likes of Shavers (first time out), Cooney and Witherspoon (I'm one of the few who think that he was food value for the decision here) were exemplary. But not without fault and, in my eyes, very likely to drop decisions at some point to the likes of Ali and perhaps even Frazier had they met in their respective primes, although splitting a series with 'Smokin' Joe' is perhaps more realistic.

Great, great Heavyweight, but probably helped a little more by his era than a few others were.

I have to disagree. Holmes takes Forman and Frazier, struggles with Ali but it would be close. The Norton fight was a case of Larry having a bad night.

Have to agree with the point regarding the punishment he shipped - even from cooney - around this time last year I had an opportunity to watch some career sets end to end and Holmes was one of them. Specifically studying - him against Tyson peak for peak. The frequency wit which Holmes took shots changed my prediction from a comfortable UD for Holmes to a Mid round KO for Tyson owing to the shots he tended to take - big ones and Tysons tendency to rush and destroy, I dont think Tyson would allow him the time to recover

Possibly, OneTwo. I did stress that Holmes wouldn't have lasted five rounds if he'd fought him the same way he fought Norton in particular. As you allude to, it's not impossible that a more experienced Holmes, who took fewer chances, might have developed to the point where he could decision the big man from Texas. Not so sure myself.

I think it's a little too easy to simply dismiss Holmes' struggles with Norton, 'Spoon and Weaver on the basis of him apparently having a 'bad night.' I think a more realistic appraisal is simply that Holmes was always prone to lapses in concentration and uninspired performances now and then. Can't envisage him having anything other than a chequered record against the likes of Ali, Frazier and Foreman in their primes as a result of that.

He's far too good to be disgraced in any of them, of course, but he's not good enough to emerge as top dog amongst all of them, either.

If we're going to use the Norton fight against Holmes, then it's only fair that we use the Jimmy Young fight against Foreman. We cannot just think of Foreman at his best and then pick one fight were Holmes didn't look at his best.

Whilst I agree that Holmes certainly had lapses, and a few less than stellar performances, name me a long reigning champ that didn't, but I doubt Holmes would have been anything but at his best for the likes of Ali, foreman etc.
However that doesn't mean that he beats them- Ali pre his ban out points him with ease, post his ban outpoints in close fight.
Norton gives him trouble every day of the week for me, so it's a pick um.
Frazier comes from behind and either stops him late or wins the late rounds and takes a close decision.
Foreman stops him quickly - Larry doesn't have the power to gain his respect, or the x factor that allowed Ali to pull off the victory in Zaire.
That said he was still a class act inside the ropes so wouldn't have been shocked to see he pull off victories against any of them.

I don't think the timing of Holmes' career was detrimental to him at all.

He's almost universally picked as a top 5/6 all time great heavyweight and after a period of reflection, I recently placed him at 3 in my list of heavyweights. There are, undoubtedly, greater talents than Larry who I've placed him ahead of but the consistency of his career ranked against his peers gives him the edge.

Put him ten years earlier (or possibly ten years later (when Tyson, Bowe, Lewis and Holyfield would be his contemporaries) and he probably ships at least a couple of losses and is not seen as the clear top dog. That would certainly affect his ranking in my eyes and I supect in the eyes of many others.