Is Holmes over Mercer comparable to anything comeback Foreman did?

Holmes, for his age at the time, and making a comeback, handled Ray Mercer far better than Lennox Lewis did, who barely escaped with a win. (I personally thought it was a draw, but many thought Ray won it).

Just had to make that point.

 

Was also in better shape vs Holmes at 228 compared to 238 vs Lewis.

 

This is a funny point. Mercer might well have beaten old Foreman (who would certainly not win off one punch no matter what) and Moorer might well have beaten old Holmes. The matchups the old guys won were the right ones for them.

 

And also handled McCall better. At least than Lennox the first time.

 

It is comparable, in terms of them both being oldies and successfully competing against younger fighters, but the version of Moorer that Foreman was pitted against was a greater challenge than the version of Mercer we saw Holmes outwit.

The Mercer win was impressive, but Mercer showed himself to be little more than an aggressive novice against the wily Holmes. Mercer simply did not or could not adapt to the conditions Holmes had laid out and sign-posted for him, round-after-round. It was child's play for Holmes. (Indeed, I recall being more frustrated by Mercer's one-dimensional insistence of doing the same thing over and over again than I was being wowed by Holmes' bread and butter performance, his age notwithstanding).

I think it was one of a couple of watershed moments for Mercer (the other being his grovelling loss to Ferguson). He would go on to get better.

Moorer was lineal champ and had, in my opinion, matured into quite a rounded competitor by the time he defended against Foreman. He too was outwitted, but in a very different way and as part of a much higher-risk strategy.

Foreman's feat is more impressive, in my view.

 

Mercer is quite forward about having been taking to school by Holmes and learning quite a bit from it, to become a better fighter.

 

Yep, styles make fights.

Agree that Foreman struggles to beat Larry. George always has a chance, but stylistically that is a matchup that favours Holmes. Not by much but I think it does. Holmes could box and stay out of George's way to a UD.

Tyson destroyed Holmes who didn't have the power to stop Mike in his tracks. Yet I think Tyson would have been stopped pretty easily by Foreman. He'd have had to get inside and walks straight into a bomb at some point. Foreman would have been able to handle a Tyson onslaught and get a shot off that ended it.

Foreman beating an undefeated lineal champion is a much greater achievement than Holmes beating Ray Mercer. Foreman also gave Holyfield more grief than Holmes did in their respective fights.

It's a great sport and this is a great discussion.