Mike Tyson had a better career than Larry Holmes.

This content is protected

 

Holmes is overrated.

I rate Tyson and him about the same. Both are top 10 HWs of all time.

 

Holmes had a better career than Tyson mostly due to having a title reign lasting 7 years compared to Tyson's 3.5 years. His quality of opposition was honestly not much better than Tyson's and he never unified all of the belts including the lineal title and was never recognized as the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world like Tyson.

So his career was only marginally better I'd say ... Head to head he is lower than Tyson and no version of Holmes beats prime Tyson.

 

Tyson has none also.
The only one you could say was in his prime is the Douglas one, although that one also wasn't cause he did not prepare and was no longer with Rooney.

 

Tyson ranks above him

 

The "did better against common opponents" argument is silly.

You might as well argue that Holmes > Ali because :

1. He beat Ali
2. He beat Leon Spinks in 3 rounds, Ali lost to him.
3. He beat Berbick, Ali lost to.
4. He beat Norton on his first attempt. Ali lost to (twice really)
5. He beat crap out of Evangelista in 7 rounds, who took Ali the full 15.
6. He schooled Shavers 12-0 on his first attempt, Shavers won at least 6 rounds of 15 against Ali.

 

The only common opponent worth talking about is Berbick, because he fought prime Tyson and prime Holmes (Holmes was still prime in April 1981).

Yes, Tyson did better in the sense of needing just 2 rounds.
Holmes went 15 rounds.
No one disputes that Tyson was the BETTER PUNCHER though, or the better "KO artist".
But Holmes completely schooled Berbick. I'm not sure Berbick deserved even 1 round.
So they both wiped the floor with the guy.

We know they were miles better than the likes of Berbick.
But that doesn't say anything about how they compare to one another.

 

The Tyson in the Bruno rematch and against Seldon was not past his prime "by a long shot". Tyson's speed and reflexes looked more or less undiminished, even though it's reasonable to think that his stamina wasn't the same after all that time away. I also think he didn't take Holy seriously enough in the first fight, but in the rematch he looked sharp and in shape.

 

You can't count a loss when a guy has changed trainer, for chrissakes. Haven't you learned anything from all the rants from Tyson fans on here?

 

Norton and Cooney wouldn't see past 6 rounds , never mind 12 rounds against prime Tyson.

Tyson on the slide around Botha and Golota would still be able to knock out Spinks.

 

Yeah, and a 45 year old Holmes would still be able to beat Danny Williams and Kevin McBride.

 

I can't imagine any version Buster Douglas KOing Holmes until maybe Holmes was in his mid-late 40s.

 

Actually, I'd give the 42 year old Holmes that fought Holy a pretty decent chance against the Holy that beat Tyson.

 

He wouldn't get his ass kicked like a 30 year-old (favoured to win) Tyson did, that's for sure.

 

Nobody said Tyson's speed and reflexes were that downgraded, that's not the issue. His skillset was the one that was no longer the same, there inlies the problem.