The Cooney fight actually took a lot out of Holmes. So I would take Holmes over the 1974 Ali before the fight with Cooney. Post June 11th, 1982, I would take Ali on points.
I would take a prime Holmes over any version of Ali. Holmes would always be a stylistic nightmare for Muhamed. Holmes was a smarter fighter with a better jab and slightly better power. Holmes was also more accurate. Ali had more speed, but Holmes could nullify that with his ring generalship.
I suppose I favour Holmes at this age, but with Ali you never know, with Holmes I know what I am getting a highly skilled fighter with a tremendous jab, Ali is so intuitive, he could just surprise you and handle that jab with ease.
This is the key. Ali was the master at improvisation and adapting to different fighters and situations.
Hard to pick here... Ali was great against "Frazier and Foreman" in '74, while Holmes displayed greatness against "Snipes and Cooney" in '81 and '82... I definately feel that Holmes has a real shot here at beating Ali in dream fight in which both dude's are age 32 yrs... Why does Holmes have a real shot here? Cuz Holmes was still more offensive minded / capable in 1982, where as Ali began needing more and more rest while looking to counter off the ropes by 1974... Not so much against Frazier, but certainly against Foreman... I got balls... A 32 year old Holmes who TKO'd Cooney in '82 decisions a 32 year old Ali of the Foreman fight... MR.BILL
in order to beat a prime Holmes or even one who was slightly slipping, Ali would have to be at his very best. Ali of 1965-1967 is probably the only version that I'd pick to do it. Muhammad had gotten slower by 1974, and was relying on a system of outlasting his opponents to win. Not something that would work against Holmes. Only way to beat Larry is to be busier than he was.
Ali tended to need respite on the ropes against pressure come forward types. Holmes was n't one of that ilk. More a stand up boxer.
Holmes can match Ali`s height, range and speed. He was just as sharp and had a similar skillset. Larry had a little more variety in his offense. Worked the body a little better and had a better uppercut. Problem for Ali is that he keeps his hands at his waist while Holmes had a more conventional stance. So while Larry Holmes is blocking, parrying many of Ali`s jabs. Ali would be eating Holmes jab square in the face. Not a good recipe for beating Larry Holmes. Ali was a great great fighter but if he couldnt dominate you with his jab he became beatable. This is not a good style matchup for him.
I was just having a look at some of my earliest threads and this was one of them. As a lot of new posters have come on to this site since then,I thought I'd see what they thought about it
By 1974, Ali was slipping fast. The Foreman win was great, but he never really impressed me in any fights after that, apart from unbelievable determination and courage of course. He barely got by Frazier (who was even more washed up in 1975), should've lost to Young, should've lost to Norton and maybe even to Shavers. On the contrary, while Holmes was also declining in 1982, he probably should've won the Spinks rematch, which would've made the Tyson fight in '88 his career ending loss. That Tyson would've demolished a 6-year-after-Foreman-Ali just as well, of course. But Holmes was still beating and being competitive with top contenders ten years after the Cooney victory, which speaks to his longevity. Ali was always more vulnerable to the boxing type of opponents, so I'd slightly lean towards Holmes here. He looked very sharp against Cooney. On the flipside, on can also argue: an aging Ali nearly beat Norton in 1977, yet a prime Holmes barely got by a somewhat more shopworn Norton a year later. Difficult pick, this one..