Mike Tyson had a better career than Larry Holmes.

Yeah they're much better and more dangerous then guys like Alfredo Evangelista, Ossie Ocasio, Lorenzo Zanon, Scott LeDoux etc

I said it was better because he dominated a similar level of opponent while Holmes struggled.

 

Amazing.


I was clearly talking about in general.

Do you think that I can't name some of Larry's opponents who weren't better than some of the lower level guys who Wlad fought??


You can compare their lower level guys.

You can compare their best opposition.

You can compare numbers regarding top 10 guys fought and title defences etc.


Wlad had a COMPARABLE reign.

The road he travelled was not much harder.


You have clearly exaggerated.

Yet you haven't got the knowledge/honesty to admit it.


Yes, Wlad beat Haye easier.

But again, Haye fought the most cautious and negative fight of his career, where Wlad just kept him off with a cautious jab.


The Holmes-Witherspoon fight was a completely different stylistic match up.

It does not mean that Wlad's win was better, and that Haye was better than Witherspoon.


It's really ironic for you to have questioned my knowledge, when you haven't allowed for the different stylistic match ups.

 

This is like a playground scrap. Not complaining tho

 

You’re basically asking me to list out forty different opponents split between the two. I’ve probably done it before and I’m sure Wlad came out ahead due to Holmes having a weak bottom half. I don’t feel like doing it right now.

 

Yeah because that's the fight Wlad forced him into whereas Holmes couldn't do the same. That says Wlad can force a good opponent to fight his fight whereas Holmes can't.

 

Also, Holmes stopped fighting top contenders around a half way of his reign. Wlad fought a number 1 contender even in his last title defence.

 

Yeah, Wlad made a point of fighting the absolute best in his last few years as champion, resulting in him being unified and undisputed while establishing lineage. It’s the main reason why he ranks ahead of Holmes.

 

Not on my list, but I can see the argument for that.

 

I haven’t specifically asked you to do that.

I’ve just asked for you to be objective, instead of trying to argue about things that nobody has even mentioned.

 

I just find it odd that 1985 seems to be a some sort of focal point in boxing history (Homes, McCallum) for you when fighters could do no wrong.

 

They were different stylistic match ups, genius.


Wlad was cautious.

Haye was extremely cautious.

So they had a very cautious chess match, in a slow paced fight.

Haye was also cautious against Valuev.


Whereas Witherspoon was confident and aggressive, where he gave Larry a great fight.


I could say that a past prime Evander could bully and knockout a still very capable version of Mike Tyson, yet a prime Evander had his hands full with a version of Larry who was in his 40’s.


That’s the beauty of the sport isn’t it.


For all we know, Larry could have had easy nights against Brewster and Sanders, whereas they knocked Wlad out.

Likewise, Wlad may have been able to have beaten Norton etc, much easier.

Styles make fights.

 

That’s because you’re blinded by stats and reigns.

So what?

It didn’t make him more skilled.

It didn’t make his opponents better.

It didn’t give him better longevity.

Wlad should never be ranked above Larry.

He tag teamed the division with his brother, and was only the man due to Vitali being out of the picture.

He was also knocked down 13 times, and knocked out 3 times by non great fighters.

If that’s your 4th best HW in the entire history of the division, then it’s a joke.

 

What are you talking about?

I’m beginning to think that you are indeed a troll.

Where has this come from?

Why 1985?

Mike hadn’t done anything at that point.

 

Cop out answer because you don't understand the technical side of boxing at all

 

Yeah.

I’ve only studied the sport for about 35 years.

SMH.


Hey genius:

Haye had great speed and explosive power.

I’m sure you’ll admit that he was a better fighter than a B level Sanders.


So why couldn’t Haye replicate what Sanders did?

What if Sanders had been ultra, ultra cautious?

What if Haye had been super confident and ultra agressive?

Then what??


Was Sam Peter better than Haye too?


Different mindsets.

Different tactics.

Different stylistic match ups.


Why did Evander find it harder against a 40 odd year old Larry, than a 30 year old Mike??