Do you agree with Mike Casey that Tyson's stoppage of a past it Larry Holmes was not an aberration

Do you agree with Mike Casey that Tyson's stoppage of a past it Larry Holmes was not an aberration and that he would have likely beaten any iteration of him:

I do not believe that Mike Tyson�s destruction of the ageing Holmes was too much of a deception. In his prime, Larry never met the like of Tyson, nor the like of a Joe Frazier who would have chased and nagged and punched away at Holmes all night long.

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/casey/MC_HolmesLewis.htm​

 

I agree. It’s a bad style match up for Holmes. By sitting on the sidelines he got to see Tyson up close, and he actually came into the fight with a great game plan to fight conservatively for first 3 rounds and try to ebb Mike’s early dynamic power. Then open up on him. I feel a prime Larry would of engaged more early and traded and being susceptible to right hands Mike would of gotten him anyway.

 

Casey is a bit of a curmudgeon but he writes well and obviously is steeped in boxing history.

 

I don't know if he beats any version of Holmes, but that overhand right that dropped Holmes and set him up for the other two knockdowns is a shot Larry was always susceptible to and others had dropped him with.

So basically the difference would be could Holmes have survived if the same right hand from Tyson connected when Larry was younger?

Maybe. Maybe not.

 

It was a big right that Schmeling dropped. Louis with in their first fight. The difference was Joe was looking for it in the rematch. Maybe a younger Larry would have been more vigilant.

 

I emailed the gentleman and it bounced back. Hope he's okay.

 

He has very strong opinions.

 

Larry got dropped more when he was younger than he did when he was older. (Nick Wells, Kevin Isaac, Renaldo Snipes, Earnie Shavers)

 

I'm trying to give Larry every benefit of the doubt.

 

I love Mike, but just as Larry never beat an opponent the caliber of Tyson, Tyson never beat an opponent (anywhere near) the caliber of Larry Holmes.

I know the Mike that fought Douglas wasn't the 1988 Mike. But Larry Holmes in his prime was at least 3 times the fighter Douglas was. Mike might have dropped Holmes back in the day, but that was always when Larry ended up scraping himself off the canvas and stopping the other guy.

Tyson gets stopped in 12.

 

That article is both sentimental and heavily inclined toward much earlier eras of fighters.

 

Mike Tyson stopped Larry Holmes, and Mike Tyson fought a number of guys who either beat Larry Holmes (Michael Spinks) or gave Holmes absolute fits (like Trevor Berbick and Carl Williams - who appeared to beat Holmes) and stopped them very quickly.

I like Larry Holmes. I think Larry in his prime would give Tyson all sorts of problems with his jab. But if Tyson cracks a young Holmes with the same right hand, I believe Tyson still finishes Holmes like he did in their actual fight.

Tyson was a better finisher than guys like Snipes and Kevin Isaac. And Larry was always a sucker for that right hand.

 

Berbick gave Holmes fits? Have you ever even watched their fight? If it wasn’t a shut out, it was damn close to it.