Does prime Larry Holmes go through Wlads resume without a single loss ?

If he’s prime every fight then yes.

Larry Holmes was the complete package and in his prime could compete with anyone. Personally have him as my number four heavyweight of all time.

Prime threats to him from that resume pool was a past prime Ray Mercer, Povetkin and Fury.

Povetkin gets torn apart by the Larry Holmes jabbing pattern he created for himself as Ali’s sparring partner and stiff right hands.

Fury of that time, pre kronk Fury, would box and lose a close decision.

 

Yes, and i still would favor him over Vitlai and wilder if They ever fought

 

I reckon he beats everyone except Fury.

 

Holmes is the most technically sound heavyweight ever. Not sure what Fury has done to convince people he could beat him.

 

If he's prime every single fight then maybe.

In real life I think he'd drop a couple.

I also think that guys that Klitschko dominated thanks to his size will be much more problematic for Holmes than for Wlad. Guys like Ibragimov, Chagaev, Povetkin and Haye who struggled with the sheer size of Wlad would be more comfortable against Holmes.

On the other hand guys that Wlad blew his wad against like Brewster and Purritty I think would be easier for Holmes, who was not prone to gassing and who would likely control them technically.

I think Sanders would have been trouble for Holmes and so would AJ and Fury, especially if we're talking about Holmes over the same span of time and the same age as Wlad.

Other fights that might have been interesting to watch would have been Pulev, who also has a jab centric fight plan and Wach, who brought sheer size and THAT chin to the party.

 

Wlad was 19 years into his professional career when he faced Fury.
That's the same stage as Holmes against Holyfield, if we took a 1973 version of Holmes in place of 1996 pro debut Wlad and followed from there exactly along Wlad's career path. (Wlad turned pro at 20, Holmes at 23, so Holmes would age sooner, he'd be about 42 against Fury).

Fury beats that old Holmes but it's possible that Holmes has gone 67-0 up to that point. Alternatively, he might drop a few decisions along the way, possibly lose to Sultan Ibragimov in 2008 or Eddie Chambers in 2010 (the equivalent of 1985 and 1987 for Holmes) because he'd be getting old then already and they are awkward boxers.
I don't see him losing to Purrity, Brewster or Sanders though, although Sanders would make an interesting opponent.

 

yes

 

No, he wasn't. Tyson, Louis, Holyfield, etc; are all better technically. Jimmy Young was better technically....

 

Considering what Nick Wells did to him in the amateurs he might get KO'd by Sanders.

 

He probably loses to Fury but he beats everyone else. Thing is he'll be a lot more inconsistent in victory, and I can see a bunch of fighters dropping and hurting him, or otherwise making his night a lot longer than it should be. Brewster could give him hell, and I think Byrd comes closest to beating him. Haye might also give him problems, but Holmes could also knock him out in a back and forth brawl. Ibragimov and Chagaev had the quality to cause Holmes to drop some rounds but they were a little too untested for me to bet on them.

Oh yeah, Sanders gives him massive issues.

 

No offense, but if Earnie Shavers and Mike Weaver couldn't ko him in his prime, Sanders ain't gonna come anywhere near.

 

Neither of those guys were southpaws.

 

This is actually an interesting and quite possibly valid point, credit where due.

Still, Sanders wasn't the level of puncher Shavers or Weaver were. Both had shocking one-punch power, and Holmes took shots flush, peeled himself back up, and knocked the bejesus out of both of them (granted in the case of Weaver it happened toward the very end of the fight).

 

Fury has serious skills, but Wlad looked shot. I was rooting against him too lol