Larry Holmes vs Mike Tyson

Right, so Shavers, Weaver and Snipes could get to Holmes but Tyson couldn't? Snipes wasn't even a big puncher and he had Larry staggering across the ring. Everyone outreached Tyson. He excelled at getting past good jabs and long reaches.

In what way did Holmes trouble Tyson? Staying upright for four rounds? Holmes had much more trouble in his prime with lesser fighters than Tyson.

 

yes I agree, I think prime holmes could of edged Tyson.

 

This is a Holmes v Tyson thread.

If you wanna debate Tyson v Williams make a Tyson v Williams thread.

 

But we aren't debating a Tyson v Williams fight. That inference had nothing at all to do with this thread.

We're debating a Holmes v Tyson fight, that should be your focus.

 

Right hands clearly troubled Holmes. I've named two men who almost had him out with rights. That's a pretty big problem when you're fighting a fast handed powerful opponent guy who has already KO'd you cold with a right hand.

Is your only point of reference Buster Douglas? How about the other men Tyson fought with good jabs? Pinklon Thomas? Tony Tucker? Carl Williams? Tony Tubbs? Holmes himself? Tyson handled all of them.

Difference is Holmes proved he wasn't a shell by returning four years later and upsetting an unbeaten, well regarded contender and losing a competitive title fight with Holyfield. Tyson didn't. Unless you're going to argue that Holmes created history by being shot at age 38 when Tyson beat him before resuming his prime at age 42.

 

But we aren't debating a Williams v Tyson fight. We are debating a Holmes v Tyson fight.

Please stop talking about Williams and stick to the topic at hand.

 

I've said nothing on thai thread that is hypocritical. If you want to debate Williams vs Tyson then start a thread on it.

 

Tyson had so much trouble with Thomas and he gave him a one-sided beating and stopped him in seven rounds. Only you could think Thomas was "troubling" Tyson. Then again you probably think Bonecrusher troubled Tyson as well.

You've still not addressed Holmes' known vulnerability to right hands and how this somehow won't be a problem against Tyson.

You've already said Holmes was shot and a "shell" when he fought Tyson. Did he manage to shake off being shot with a few tune-ups FOUR YEARS LATER?

Are you really arguing that Holmes was shot when he lost to Tyson at 38 but not at 42? Or did a shell manage to beat Mercer and go the distance with Holyfield?