Prime Tyson v. Prime Holmes

I find that Mikes absolute best performances against much lesser opposition are too faithfully imported into imagined fights against opposition far superior to the opposition in question that Mike did engage -

- and that includes the actual 88 version of Holmes vs the prime 81/82 model.

Funny that Larry actually lasted longer than the other opposition engaged - Spinks and Tubbs - during what is broadly considered Mike’s absolute peak year - 1988.

I might actually prefer Mike’s performance and win over Tubbs over the other two fights.

Quick handed Tubbs chanced his arm but Mike’s performance was super tight, not to be denied and highly impressive overall.

 

Does much lesser opposition refer to the guy who beat Holmes, the guy who almost beat Holmes, Larry Holmes himself, or the guy who Larry Holmes ducked?

 

Holmes doesn't have enough firepower. But he made up for it with heart.

It wouldn't matter against a young dynamo in the peak of his career.

Tyson wins.

 

Yes, of course, as compared to the prime version of Holmes.

Even an old, ill prepared Holmes lasted that much longer than a **** scared Spinks and a so so chinned Williams - how long did they last in total? Yes, that’s right, 3 mins and 4 secs.

Larry lasted longer than Tubbs also.

You’re also referring to fights when Holmes was 35 - 36 yo. Amazing.

Do we go there with Mike instead of observing the usual false and impossibly tight parameters some like to impose when assessing Tyson in kind?

I see you already gave Mike an excuse for deliberately getting himself DQ’d against Holyfield - a fight in which he was heading toward another loss to Evander -

That’s the same Evander who old man Larry, posting a creditable performance, was able to go the distance against, - something a younger Mike couldn’t even manage despite two attempts.

 

Holmes by UD with some scary moments along the way.

 

Larry takes a wide decision, and badly beats up Tyson in the championship rounds.

 

You seem a little wound up. How old is Usyk?

 

15 years older than when Tyson lost to Douglas.

 

15 years older than when Holmes got stopped by Nick Wells?

 

Bringing an amateur fight into a prime vs prime discussion between 2 x ATGs?

You're going to have to make your trolling more subtle than that to get a bite here.

 

Or... Usyk is the same age as Tyson when he lost to McBride.

 

As others have alluded to, we seem to cherry pick what 'prime' looks like and for me it is a mythical unicorn creation of all of the fighters best attributes. It is difficult to nail a particular fight or timescale for an example of prime because someone will always say 'but remember that bit of that fight when....'. For me, the best possible version of Holmes had mobility, durability, power and way too much smarts for the best possible version of Mike, and I rate Mike. Mike's tear from jist before he won the title till about Spinks, say 86-88 won't be repeated in style, ferocity or cultural impact. But prime Larry beats that Mike for me. I actually have both fighters an h2h nightmare for many others but Larry was, in my opinion, special, a level or two above Mike as a boxer if not as an attraction..

 

This is just bordering on delusion at this point.

 

Does Holmes beat Tyson in a firefight as well?

 

You don’t make the rules. You brought up age for the youngest heavyweight champion of all time as if he should’ve fought until age 40.