I am want to think not. Stylistically, Ali did not have what hurt Holmes, while Holmes had some attributes that would stifle Ali. Your thoughts on the subject.
Ali from Sonny to Foreman-Norton would win clearly Late TKO or UD , right hands, speed and confidence.....Holmes had a strong Jab, Ali's was faster, Ali had good feet, both had strong minds and will but Ali has more
Holmes had excellent speed himself. Ali's speed wasn't enough to dissuade Norton. Speed alone doesn't beat guys like Holmes. Witness fighters like Camacho and Taylor against true champions. The deciding factor in this match-up would be strength. Holmes had ret@ard strength, incredibly strong off the ropes and in clinches. The fact that he was a championship wrestler in high school becomes mightily apparent. He would control action around and off the ropes, clinches, disengage Ali's holding tactics and use his own favorite behind the neck hold while uppercutting. Also, Holmes knew how to go to the body with speed. Head to head, it's not about match-up. It's about style. Holmes muscles out a close decision.
Ali's s[eed of foot in the '70's was nothing like the '60's. Neither Norton nor Holmes would take him. Holmes & Ali both were very effective grapplers & rule benders. Ali did so effectively with Foreman even. Holmes without looking muscular was strong, Ali actually weighed slightly more when both were in their true prime. good Berbick refernce SteveO.
Ali had a jab that was quicker, better foot speed and insane reflexes. Holmes for all his strengths was always hittable and never had the type of movement that could match the phenom that was pre-exhile Ali. When you think of the issues Holmes had with the likes of Norton, Snipes, Witherspoon and Williams (admittedly for the latter two he was past his best) then you have to think a guy who was so much quicker, more skilled, smarter and flat out more gifted athletically, would likely turn the trick. Plus Ali was very strong himself and you'd think that would negate much of Larry's awkward strength. That being said it's no white wash either. Holmes was wonderfully skilled, brave and incredibly ring smart himself and he'd cause Ali huge problems. But Ali's superior athleticism gives him the edge for mine.
I only just read about that recently. woah. I think Alis speed and evasiveness keep him just, but only marginally, ahead of the Assassin for a hair breadth split decision. Holmes wins 1 outta 3 in a series of matches,either in the first match, or sending ali into early retirement in the last fight. Its clear Holmes would have ended Ali at the age of 35+, shame he was forced to wait so long to "enforce" lineal status.
Depends which Ali we're talking about. Prime for prime it's Ali. After that it gets a little more "iffy". I'd be willing to still favor Ali up to the '74 version that beat Frazier and Foreman. Not by a lot but still favor him. As for strength, Ali was stronger than many think. Foreman was unable to do anything with him in close despite his own strength and was tied up pretty effectively by Ali many times during their fight. With Ali/Holmes we would have 2 fighters with similar styles/attributes trying to nullify each other's attributes which would result in a chess match more than a knock down drag out war. At his best Ali was faster and more fluid. Best Ali wins.
I would pick Muhammad Ali of the late 60's to out point Holmes. He could basically do to a younger version of Larry what Carl Williams did to an older one, as he had greater speed and outside boxing ability.
I think a prime Holmes has the edge. Ali was pretty much a jab and cross type of fighter. Holmes' jab was a little better. Unlike Ali, Holmes could target the body, in-fight, and use an uppercut. Holmes could fight at long distance or close range, and hurt you with either hand. In the ring Holmes was less prone to putting himself in a bad positon.