boxing
Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


View Poll Results: Do you agree with them?
I agree with them 6 16.22%
I disagree with them 31 83.78%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-28-2008, 09:37 AM   #61
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoccoMarciano
I suppose this is accurate, although I hate to admit it. Tyson would have always won, at that time.. I just think, in the long term, Spinks was the better champion - more based on long term personality than anything else. I know that is a flaw of mine, no sense in going over it again.

I still think Spinks could have done better were he around people that told him he was going to win.... I don't think he had that for this fight. Spinks would have still lost... but he would have shown just how great he was through better mindset!

Kinda like crying over nothing, but Spinks was a great boxer... kinda sad a lot of people, probably, only remember him because of the Tyson loss.
Spinks had quite possibly the best trainer and strategist in history beside him and was unbeaten. If this wasn't enough nobody and nothing was going to be IMO. I don't doubt his potential to rise and possibly defeat any man at 175 in history, but i can name 10 at least he was never going to beat at Heavyweight IMO. Tyson wasn't an overconfident over the hill Holmes, he was a well oiled fighting machine at his (hindsight) peak.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 04-28-2008, 09:38 AM   #62
Sizzle
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 647
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by slicksouthpaw16
Like you contribute to genuine arguements? Most people on this forum admitted that you were the biggest Jones hater on this forum and you don't know what you are talking about half of the time. If you are not apart of a conversation, then leave the thread and stop wasting people's time.
Half of the time better than none of the time
Sizzle is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 09:41 AM   #63
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by slicksouthpaw16

You didn't directly say that Holmes was in his prime,
Well why did you say that he did

Quote:
According to Sweet Pea, RoccoMarciano, Godking, and Wealty Elite,Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him
Little wonder The Pea is ****ed, you're a blatant liar
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 09:42 AM   #64
Robbi
Marvelous
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 7,550
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnThomas1
But he still got more fanfare and support vs Tyson than near all the others. Hindsight is great but Tyson flogged a guy many thought would be a live opponent. It's a quite decent win even if not earth shattering.
Yeah, no doubt about it. Spinks was the biggest marquee fight of Tyson's career up until the first Holyfield fight, hence your "fanfare" statement. And he was a decent operator at heavyweight, perhaps underrated. I must admit I was impressed with how easily Spinks dealt with ****ey. But fighters like Tucker and Ruddock had the natural weight, power, and were closer to their primes than Spinks. Ring generalship and pure skills, Spinks edges them both slightly at heavyweight.
Robbi is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 09:48 AM   #65
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbi
Yeah, no doubt about it. Spinks was the biggest marquee fight of Tyson's career up until the first Holyfield fight, hence your "fanfare" statement. And he was a decent operator at heavyweight, perhaps underrated. I must admit I was impressed with how easily Spinks dealt with ****ey. But fighters like Tucker and Ruddock had the natural weight, power, and were closer to their primes than Spinks. Ring generalship and pure skills, Spinks edges them both slightly at heavyweight.
Can't argue much on this one.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 09:54 AM   #66
punchy
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 897
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by slicksouthpaw16
According to Sweet Pea, RoccoMarciano, Godking, and Wealty Elite,Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him and the fact that he was inactive for 2 years with no tune ups didn't matter, the same result would have happened to peak Holmes. Is it me or is that one of the most bogus and disrespectful thing that i have heard? They also said that Tyson wasn't vulnerable to a consistant jab, despite Tucker, Biggs, Douglas, Quick Tliis ect all having success with theirs, with Tillis even frustrating Tyson and Douglas controling Tyson throughout the fight.
It was only Douglas who had arguably the best jab in the division at the time that was effective. Holmes was not in his prime though.
punchy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 12:21 PM   #67
AnthonyJ74
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,577
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

I don't think Holmes was as far past his prime as many believe when he fought Tyson. He was definitely over-the-hill and past his prime, but how far past it was he?

In the second Spinks fight - in April of 1986 - Holmes showed that he was still a very strong and capable fighter. He looked pretty sharp and solid in that fight. So, from April 1986 until roughly the Summer or Fall of 1987 when the Tyson fight was signed, Holmes was inactive. Holmes was not inactive for two solid years prior to fighting Tyson as many people claim; it was more like 14 or 15 months.

And Holmes himself even said before the Tyson fight that he thought the layoff would benefit him somewhat...It was only after Tyson starched him that Holmes started moaning about how the layoff affected him and was detrimental to his chances; before the fight his tune was totally different.

So, I doubt that Holmes was going to deteriorate THAT much from April of 1986 until January of 1988. He was only inactive for a little over a year before he started training for the Tyson fight.
AnthonyJ74 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 12:53 PM   #68
Rumsfeld
Moderator
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Go to the Mushroom Mag!
Posts: 19,174
vCash: 75
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Club Fighter
Co-sign this whole post from the top all the way down to holmes jabbing like a machine . . . he was dancing, too.


That was ****ing awesome! Too bad Larry wasn't better prepared for that one. Larry actually started performing better a few years after the Tyson bout. I still love the way he used every trick in the book to out-wit Mercer.

Rumsfeld is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 01:04 PM   #69
Rumsfeld
Moderator
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Go to the Mushroom Mag!
Posts: 19,174
vCash: 75
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ripcity
5. Tyson would still have won if they meet in their primes.
I doubt it.

Rumsfeld is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 02:27 PM   #70
teeto
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Team Ireland Manor, Easing Pabuiao into the life of managing the GOAT
Posts: 14,048
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnThomas1
So you don't think Rudduck and Thomas were elite of their day at the time Tyson fought em? Or you do? Bit lost sorry.
Its alright, im explainin' mysellf a bit poorly i think!! They are top wins at the time, and make for a very very good resume. Its just the usage of the word 'elite', thats all, i personally reserve that term for the very finest fighters/achievers in a division's history.

I understand others use the term in a different context, but in fairness i did explain my own definition if you like of the word before Ironchamp posted his argument disagreeing with my post.
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 02:28 PM   #71
ripcity
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: "Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it."
Posts: 10,232
vCash: 964
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumsfeld
I doubt it.

I dobut your dobut.
ripcity is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 03:41 PM   #72
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 14,065
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyJ74
I don't think Holmes was as far past his prime as many believe when he fought Tyson. He was definitely over-the-hill and past his prime, but how far past it was he?

In the second Spinks fight - in April of 1986 - Holmes showed that he was still a very strong and capable fighter. He looked pretty sharp and solid in that fight. So, from April 1986 until roughly the Summer or Fall of 1987 when the Tyson fight was signed, Holmes was inactive. Holmes was not inactive for two solid years prior to fighting Tyson as many people claim; it was more like 14 or 15 months.

And Holmes himself even said before the Tyson fight that he thought the layoff would benefit him somewhat...It was only after Tyson starched him that Holmes started moaning about how the layoff affected him and was detrimental to his chances; before the fight his tune was totally different.

So, I doubt that Holmes was going to deteriorate THAT much from April of 1986 until January of 1988. He was only inactive for a little over a year before he started training for the Tyson fight.
I think he was pretty well shot myself. Going without a single fight in two years, is a long time for a 38 year old going in against a peak champion in his prime. You also don't have to look very far back to see that Holmes was slipping. The Williams, Smith and Witherspoon fights showed telltale signs of deterioration, and keep in mind, this was still a younger and more active fighting Holmes. Larry's best years were arguably between 1978-1982. From 1983-1986, he was heading down hill. By 1988, and after not having fought in two years, he was pretty much a shell of himself. Holmes best fight weight was around 212-217. In fact, the Witherspoon fight of early 1983 would be that last time that he was able to keep his weight under 220. He was about 225 against Tyson which isn't a collosal difference, but you could still see the pouch around his waste. He was out of shape..

His comeback showed that he was still capable of putting on boxing gloves, but we can't get too carried away over it, nor use it to justify that he wasn't shot against Tyson. For one thing, he merged himself back into the game by taking on easy opponents, and mainly sticking to fighters which best suited his style. Even Ray Mercer although a great win, was more handpicked as top raters go, and Holmes even said he wanted to avoid the Ruddock's and the Witherspoons. This is a huge difference from coming out cold after a two year layoff and fighting the very best in the world, not to mention, a deadly puncher which is the worst type of fighter for a veteran on the comeback trail to face right away.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 04:38 PM   #73
Sweet Pea
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: I never sleep, cuz sleep is the cousin of death
Posts: 13,604
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sizzle
Dude... I know you're frustrated, but like I told John Thomas, do you think what you're saying is getting through..?

You'd have a better hope of reasoning with a brick wall.

I would have to recommend you drop the argument, stand back at laugh at him (like I do) and start contributing to genuine arguments
I agree, I'll end this right here. Everyone on this forum is against him and he's still deluding himself into thinking he's not fully retarded, which is obviously ridiculous.
Sweet Pea is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 04:43 PM   #74
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 23,354
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollack
A lengthy layoff hurts anyone, especially though when they are in their mid-30s. Plus, Holmes had shown that he was slipping even when he was active. He was definitely slipping as of the Carl Williams fight. If you watch him against Spinks, in both fights, you will see that is not the same razor sharp guy that fought Leon Spinks, Ossie Ocasio, etc. in the 79-82 era. Those were his prime years. Quite frankly, after ****ey, Larry started to gradually slip, because I don't think he was ever quite as motivated again, did not see the huge mega-fight on the horizon. I think most of those subsequent defenses were just par for the course paycheck days at the office, nothing really special to him, and he was just going through the motions. When you make huge money in one fight, a lot of times it is hard to get "up" for the little ones. There just weren't the big ones back then, especially not once guys like Norton, Shavers, Leon Spinks, Ali, and ****ey were gone. None of the rest of those guys were "names" that the public would get really amped and excited about. Not saying those other defenses weren't against good fighters, and there were good fighters out there, but none of which really captured the public's imagination where he could look forward to an extravaganza. Plus, keep in mind that Larry didn't win the title until he was like 28 years old, so his prime years were not going to be that lengthy anyway. For him to reign for 7 years and have 20 defenses was wonderful, but you cannot expect him to be anywhere near as good in his mid to late 30s, especially not after a lengthy layoff.
Exvcellent stuff!
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 05:39 PM   #75
JohnThomas1
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11,119
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Larry Holmes was in his prime when Tyson beat him(Read the post first)

Quote:
Originally Posted by teeto
Its alright, im explainin' mysellf a bit poorly i think!! They are top wins at the time, and make for a very very good resume. Its just the usage of the word 'elite', thats all, i personally reserve that term for the very finest fighters/achievers in a division's history.

I understand others use the term in a different context, but in fairness i did explain my own definition if you like of the word before Ironchamp posted his argument disagreeing with my post.
Ah ok, much clearer now. Cheers teeto.
JohnThomas1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015