How does prime Larry Holmes vs Mike Tyson go?

Tyson always wastes Holmes

 

Holmes in 10, possibly sooner. Buster Douglas at his best wasn't 1980 Larry Holmes (no excuses). Neither was past-it Holyfield.

Douglas proved that even an average puncher with a real good jab, decent chin, and perseverance could beat Mike. Again, this is not taking into consideration any excuses the under 25 year old Mike may have had for Tokyo. Straight up.

No one had taken the fight to Mike as effectively as Douglas, including Tucker (who might have been surprised if he had). Holyfield did pretty much the same, punching a lot and stifling Mike's rushes.

Holmes would have done his usual: snap that heavy, nasty-as-hell jab again and again, hold whenever Mike got extra frisky, smothered him and manipulated his body off balance. The difference isn't just Larry's superior jab to the two above, but his uppercut, which most certainly would have met its mark whenever Mike got too close to closing the gap. The uppercut would have made Mike do his usual cautious, one shot at a time approach, the one far less effective than his usual whirlwind. Though even Mike mentioned that Larry was extremely hard to hit, he'd eventually have landed flushed and floored Larry in the middle rounds (when the latter usually took a little break), but Holmes in his prime was known to scrape himself off the canvas and get back in control soon after a knockdown. Back then, if he got floored he came back to ultimately stop the opponent. There would be no difference here. By the 9th Mike would be staggering from the right crosses. 10th round the jab is snapping back his head. Holmes corners him, gives his usual hail-of-rights, ref steps in.

And this is coming from a big fan of Mike. I don't see him getting past Louis, Liston, prime Foreman, Ali (64-to-74), FOTC Frazier (and quite probably Steward-era Lewis) either.

 

Tyson KO 5-7.

 

Larry needs a left hook off the jab against this opponent. It isn't there. He also needs to move counterclockwise instead of his clockwise rotation. Tyson knows where he is moving to and can land those very quick and deadly combos of his.

 

If we talk about 1988 Mike Tyson - the outcome would be the same. After the fourth round, certainly, and I assume that Holmes would not have been knocked out (like then; the only time in his career), but that a technical knockout would have happened.

 

I go for Holmes in a 60/40 chance but it would be very tight for seven rounds or so. It could easily go the other way as even a prime Larry could be caught with Tyson's explosive combinations. More than likely Larry would weather the very rocky storm,rising off the canvas once or twice,and stopping a discouraged Mike anytime after ten rounds or so.

 

It really depends how Holmes approaches the fight, either guy can win and Larry deployed a pretty good plan when they actually did fight, Holmes seemed to be frustrating Tyson. I’d pick Mike to win but it’d look really awkward.

 

I don't think the Holy fights are a very good guide, since I don't see Holmes trying those tactics. The Douglas fight is better, but that is one fight. The only time I've seen prime Tyson truly bothered by a jab (discounting Tillis as pre prime) even though Thomas had some success, but it was also arguably the best jab Tyson had to face during these years. The one closest to Holmes's, but still not quite at that level.

On the other hand, Holmes showed a weakness for getting caught with the right long before Tyson caught him with it, so you can argue it both ways. As often is the case.

 

For a lot of very good to great fighters, I think the negative difference between their prime and past prime qualities would perhaps see a KO in Tysons favour in, say, 3-4 rounds.

Mike was that type of a fighter - but the difference for Mike between an empathic early round KO and a very tough fight or one in which he ultimately loses - maybe the mere 2-3 extra rounds longer that certain great fighters would more than likely survive until.

I believe Larry is one of those fighters - and even given the mere < 4 rounds we saw of Larry against Tyson - it was no realistic gage on how the prime Holmes would fight and fare against Iron Mike - but psychologically for the fans, such KOs can leave an indelible mark that might be difficult to divorce from prime v prime calculations.

Imo, a fully empowered, uber mobile and duly cautious Holmes survives the crucial early rounds window to eventually overtake and stop Mike in the later rounds.

If I’m wrong, then obviously Mike will have beaten the Doomsday Clock and KO’d or stopped Larry in under 6-7 rounds.

Again, in view of their specific styles, strengths and weaknesses it’s that type of fight that can only yield very limited, reasonably calculated types of outcomes - outcomes that might seem extremely opposed but the difference between the calculations concluding one or the other outcome might not be so great - at least imo -

 

I think Tyson at his best beats Holmes at his best….he’d be able to get through and finish him.

 

Mike was always susceptible to a heavy jab- Tucker and Buster. Larry jabs his head off.

 

I would say 10 years earlier, 1978 would have been about right for Larry Holmes, in that year he defeated Earnie Shavers via decision then beat Ken Norton in 15 rounds to become WBC Champion.

 

I would still favor Tyson, but this would be much more competitive. Holmes had just as much boxing ability and even more brains than Douglas and could've executed that gameplan if the inspiration reached him. However, Holmes was still vulnerable to overhand rights. If Tyson managed to take away Holmes' jab with his head movement and step in+body shots strategy, Holmes would find himself either covering up and going into survival mode or getting broken down. There's the uppercut of Holmes, but the question would be if he could land it both frequently enough and with enough power to slow Tyson down and I'm not sure he could. On paper it's a bad matchup because despite Holmes having several tools for victory, his style and more measured approach meant he would be uncomfortable with Tyson's breakneck high speed pace not giving him room to execute the gameplan.

Gun to my head, Tyson manages to KO the Easton Assassin within 7-9 rounds after a very thrilling back and forth war. As I noted in another thread, while Holmes had an amazing jab he could be timed and countered due to the fact he didn't always vary the range, speed, or angle of his jab. Holmes may have some tools to beat Tyson, but Tyson has even more tools to beat Holmes.

 

Holmes cannot take Tyson’s best for long as was proven when they fought. Holmes has no power or strength to ever get Tyson’s respect. Tyson always walks through him, drops him with a big overhand right and then finishes Holmes without a fuss. Their actual fight was very telling. I’m amazed people can’t see this. And I like Holmes.