Larry Holmes: Klitschko has no jab, no heart and would be beaten by Wilder or Stivern

Well, to be fair, he HAD had 40 odd fights ... not exactly a newbie. I think that the reason he lost so badly is because he completely underestimated what Sanders was capable of, took the fight lightly and as you said, didn't even bother watching fight footage. That was a bad mistake. I've been following Corrie since he beat down Du Plooy, and I can promise you that if he was properly trained and motivated (and he was for the Klitschko fight) he'd be a handfull for almost any heavyweight.

 

Oh get off it, Wlad has not lost in his prime. His prime started 3-4 fights AFTER Steward. Wlad's losses were all well before that.

 

Physical prime? Yes. I don't think that can be argued. But some would say that he has improved technically since his losses and that this has more than compensated for his aging.

 

I believe the original discussion was comparing Holmes 20 title defenses to Wlad's 17 title defenses so Holmes didn't fight Tyson or Evander during his reign. Furthermore Spinks would get drilled in todays era. His Heavyweight resume was:

Holmes X2
Steffan Tangstad
Gerry ****ey

Holmes was past his best and it is arguable he won 1 of the fights
Tangstad was awful
Gerry was a walking corpse at that point

That is not an impressive resume nor does it elicit any confidence that he could beat today's top Heavyweights.

 

Read post 459.

:good

 

No. He was comparing successful title defenses, and you touted out the guys that beat Larry as some sort of ace card. Had Larry actually beat those guys you would have a point, but he lost to them

 

only question here is whether Holmes can overcome the physical advantages of Wlad. There is no question Larry is the more naturally skilled.

Wlad had to be taught to fight by Steward. Larry could always fight.

Based on the Gerrey, conventional wisdom would dictate that the more skilled fighter Holmes would find a way to win. Larry by close decision.

 

OMG so Klitschko could not fight early is that what you say? Klitschko was a bad** before Stewerd, he was missing some thing in his game and was panic like hell when he was hit. He didnt know what to do. But his skills, power and speed was always great, tho with Manny they become even more godly.

 

I was just looking for a purpose in life, and right now I lend towards "End the use of 'Mike Tyson was mentally shot'-argument on ESB."

Slacking off can never be the same as beeing past prime. In order to be past prime you need to suffer from severe wear and tear or be seriously old. Everything else is called beeing overrated or at least slithgly overrated.

 

How on earth would Larry Holmes beat Wladimir Klitschko? People who live with this image of reality needs to explain how it could happen. How would a snappy jab and polished right hand with B+ power overcome a SHW with superior reach, power, ring-IQ, comparable speed and reflexes who always spearheads his offence with a very versatile jab? Divine intervention is the only thing that comes to mind ...

 

deal:deal

 

superior reach ???? holmes reach was longer and his jab so much faster and sharper perhaps not as heavy as wlads but so much faster and sharper = the not a good sighn for wad

 

your a pure idiot ...try using holmes prime from 78 to 82 and wlad looses to holmes/ povetkin gets ass kicked by holmes....byrd also .....and one punch at a time haye would get beaten ....

 

Same reach.

 

But it's a bit predictable, unlike Wlad's hook jab that doubles as a KO punch, not good for Holmes.