From a 1-10 scale what you rate holmes in the Tyson fight?

I didn't mean the exact round was expected or predicted - how often is that the case ?
I mean everyone (almost everyone) expected Holmes to take a beating. Most were probably FEARING that it would last longer than 4 rounds.
It was expected to be a massacre, some way or the other.

 

I vehemently disagree that any version of Holmes could not beat that '88 version of Tyson.

In their actual fight their really wasn't much between them even until midway through the fourth round when Holmes got nailed for the first of three knockdowns. When Larry was on the move using his legs and lateral movement Tyson looked even amateurish at times. Larry connected with some uppercuts and dropped in a few good right hands before he himself got knocked down.

Holmes showed no indication he was hurt by any of Tyson's punches up until the moment he got dropped.

Several other fighters like Tillis, Green, Smith, and Tucker took Tyson the distance, and Prime Holmes was better than all of those guys combined, but he was also a lot older than those guys when he fought Tyson.

I remember reading where Holmes said he planned to move around and make Tyson miss and take away his energy and then go after him around the 5th or 6th round. So, Holmes did have a strategy in mind, he just got caught.

Now as to why he got caught...because he didn't have the legs to move around as he did in his prime! Watch the fourth round where Holmes becomes more flat-footed, that's why Tyson was able to nail him. Holmes couldn't keep up that kind of movement anymore. In his prime he had the legs to move all night long, and that was 15 rounders.

If I recall, Michael Moorer decided to stand in front of George Foreman in the 10th round and got blasted out too after winning nearly every round! Teddy Atlas was yelling at Michael not to stand in front of George right before "It Happened!"

Prime Holmes would keep that piston jab in Mikes face, lots of lateral movement and when Tyson tried to get inside Holmes would nail him with full leverage uppercuts and big right hands and wear Tyson down late in fight.

Honestly, I don't see how Tyson could beat Holmes in his prime. He wouldn't knock Larry out in the manner he did because Holmes wouldn't be right in front of him to get knocked out. If Tyson did manage to knock Larry down he would get back up and survive because he had great recuperative ability and was plenty quick and enough power and heart to win.

 

So because he moved and boxed well for two rounds he could beat Tyson in his prime? Tyson had something to do with forcing Holmes to stand and fight Tyson a little more. The difference between Holmes and guys like Smith and Tucker is that Holmes would never just try and hold and survive and Tyson would definitely make Holmes stand and fight at some point, just probably not in three rounds.

 

The actual 1988 fight tells us nothing about how a prime Holmes (c. 1980) would do against Tyson.

 

Yes but in the 80's being 38 was considered ancient. In the 90's Holmes was more competitive with the top guys at a much higher age, and it was more accepted with the whole Foreman comeback.

 

No but his size and punching power does, and Holmes was just never big or strong enough to keep Tyson off of him. Tyson would make him fight at some point.

 

.... and what does that tell us ? :huh
If the 1990s heavyweights weren't good enough to completely discredit a flabby 40-something Holmes, that doesn't have any bearing on how much Holmes had slipped from age 30 to age 38.
I don't see the relevance of the 1990s in saying how Holmes was in 1988.

I think 38 is ancient (in most cases) and certainly when a fighter's decline has already been duly noted for 4 or 5 years, and with retirements and lay-offs.

 

Holmes was 6'3 with 80 inch reach, and very strong.

 

So because he moved and boxed well for two rounds he could beat Tyson in his prime?

Yes, because he was a much better fighter in his prime. Plain and simple.

Tyson had something to do with forcing Holmes to stand and fight Tyson a little more.

Correct. However, prime Holmes stamina and reflexes and leg movement was vastly better than this depleted version.


The difference between Holmes and guys like Smith and Tucker is that Holmes would never just try and hold and survive and Tyson would definitely make Holmes stand and fight at some point, just probably not in three rounds.

Agreed. But by the time Holmes would settle down to engage in a 'fight' would be later where Tyson would not be a ball of fire like the earlier rounds.

 

Regardless, I believe it's fair to say that prime Holmes standing absolutely no chance against prime Tyson would be foolish.

 

I never said that, I just think prime Tyson beats prime Holmes. Thats just my opinion.

 

You think prime Tyson beats everyone though, (or is at least 50-50). correct ?

 

Yes but he was competitive with top guys. You've already attributed Holmes decent showing against Holyfield to an off night for Holyfield. Undefeated Ray Mercer coming off his destruction of Tommy Morrison was never any good although 43 year old Holmes handed him his first loss. :good

There is no doubt Holmes was old and past his best, but saying Tyson beat him like he did because Holmes was rusty is a bunch of crap.

 

So, who would you pick lefthook31 if a 38-year-old Tyson of the Kevin McBride fight were to face the 1980 Larry Holmes who tko'd Ali?