Hot Take Larry Holmes Outboxes Mike Tyson

I do see Holmes losing. Because he did. Inside of 4 rounds, in fact.

 

I remember Larry saying to his corner 'big round baby' and going out, getting on his toes and flicking that jab out for about...30 seconds...in that fight but that brief moment was so illuminating for me and convinced me that prime, fit, mean Holmes overcomes adversity and beats prime Mike. A big supposition I get ya, but I just think styles make fights and larry was one of the toughest 'stylists' to lace them on...

 

IMO Tyson probably wins again but it's a competitive fight unlike in 1988.

 

Holmes was very close to his prime when he fought Tyson imo.....you could say that he was IBF Champion
Because 95 % of the boxing fans believe that he beat Michael Spinks in the re-match

 

Holmes is so overrated on here.

 

I think beating Holmes was Tyson's best performance after his surgical dismantling of Tyrell Biggs. On those two nights he looked incredible.

 

I was a huge fan of Holmes throughout his career yet prime Tyson all wrong for any version of Holmes. Holmes obviously ranks higher on All time lists but H2H, I’ll take Tyson by KO every time. Holmes, great as he was, was always susceptible to rights. He got clipped countless times by lesser fighters than Tyson. He had the same habit as Ali of moving straight back and would pay for it many times. Unlike Shavers, Snipes, Issacs etc, Tyson was one of the best finishers the game has had. 86-88 version of Tyson had tremendous stamina and was still fresh late in fights so I don’t see Holmes drowning him as some here claim. Holmes on the other hand, was thoroughly exhausted in several of his distance fights. Holmes claimed he was ill prepared for Tyson fight, which may have been the case. However, he went on to be highly successful after that fight yet never once asked for the rematch. It’s because Tyson had his number and he knew it.

 

Mike Tyson is the most overrated boxer of all time, so what’s your point? Holmes is perfectly rated and fought in the stronger half of the 80s compared to Tyson.

Does Mike even have a better win than a prime Tim Witherspoon or 1978 Ken Norton?

 

Witherspoon and Norton are good fighters, but not great ones. Both fights were either-way.

Holmes may (very arguably) have fought in the better era, but has very few of the fighters on his resume who made it so, and that is because he has openly ducked fighters and bragged about it.

He's not perfectly rated. Many on here rate him as 3rd of all time, a few even higher, and there is no justification for that. He's in the bottom half of the top ten.

 

Both fights were competitive, but if you think they could have gone either way, you’re as delusional as Fury fans claiming his fights with Usyk could go either way. Witherspoon and Norton were great fighters when Holmes fought them, but that doesn’t change my point: Tyson doesn’t have a better win. Holmes being ranked third all-time is as insane as Tyson being ranked in the top 8.

 

And maybe Tyson is just a bad style for Holmes to deal with on top of being one of the most athletically gifted HWs of all time. The things Tyson does best, namely, countering the jab, forcing opponents out of position, and attacking while opponents are exiting range, are all things which are foils to Holmes' style.

 

A prime Holmes does to Tyson what Buster Douglas did..