Foreman V Holmes 1977-One Of Boxing's Greatest What Ifs?

Yes but again you're missing the point.

Holmes hadn't had a big fight prior to Shavers he was going through the motions getting paid peanuts against mediocre opposition.

He had no incentive or motivation prior to Shavers to go up another level simply because the level of opposition he was fighting.

Yes you've said multiple times Holmes hadn't shown what he did prior to Shavers but you're still not understanding the point i'm making.

The point is in Holmes’s first big fight of his career he rose to the occasion and fought at a level above anything he'd shown before.

And that's simply because Holmes had the incentive and motivation as it was his first time in a big fight that he could really prove himself.

So his mindset was completely different compared to fighting for peanuts against mediocre opposition.

That's the point.

So what I'm saying is if Holmes was fighting against a much greater challenge in Foreman compared to fighting Robinson. His mindset and preparation would be totally different.

So saying Holmes would be exactly the same vs Foreman as he was vs Robinson makes absolutely no sense to me at all.

Holmes didn't dominate Norton because Norton was a very troubling stylistic match up for him ? And no version of Holmes would ever dominate Norton ? Just like Ali was never able to dominate Norton in 3 fights because he was a stylistic problem for him.

So I don't understand your point here styles make fights.

Foreman dominated Norton.

Norton gave Ali hell.

But yet Foreman lost to Ali.

Just because Holmes struggled against Norton doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to beat Foreman ?

I'm also bit baffled you're so confident in Foreman beating Holmes based on a loss to Young where he got beat pretty clearly and retired after the fight.

 

Just because Holmes edged Norton in 1978 doesn't mean George Foreman doesn't knock Larry's head off, either, a year earlier.

And George Foreman didn't retire at 28 because he lost a 12-round decision.

He retired because he collapsed from dehydration and started hallucinating ... and believed he had a religious experience and saw his own death ... and he devoted the next decade of his life to preaching gospel.

Do you know how dehydrated you have to be to hallucinate your own death to the point that you change your entire life?

George Foreman lost decisions after that. Losing a points decision had nothing to do with it. When he lost other decisions, he wasn't dehydrated to the point he needed to be hospitalized, like he was after the Young fight.

He was so dehydrated, he was hallucinating his balls off.

Again, if you are basing your opinion that Holmes beats Foreman in 1977 because Foreman lost on points to Young, you are leaving out a lot of things. Including the fact that Holmes barely made it four rounds himself without sucking air between the fourth and fifth rounds of his fight.

You're not going to change my mind. And I'm not going to keep repeating myself.

I'll take George.

Also, YOU MAY THINK Larry was just unmotivated and lazy before he got the Shavers fight, that they weren't paying him enough to try hard, and Larry was just great all along. BUT I DO NOT. And his in-the-ring performances don't support that claim. He tried in a lot of fights. He tried really hard to knock out Horace Robinson in San Juan.

Larry got better over the years, like I said. But he wasn't there in 1977. Hell, IMO, he wasn't as good as he'd get by 1978 or 1979, either, when Mike Weaver was giving him hell. I don't feel Holmes became a truly dominant fighter until the 1980s.

George was still great in 1977. He just got severely dehydrated to the point of hospitalization and he experienced some life-changing hallucinations. Gil Clancy said they had to help Foreman walk back to the dressing room, and once there, Clancy and Foreman's handlers had to carry him into the shower. George was screaming and yelling gibberish, they were terrified.

But George thought he was dying. He was in the hospital for a better part of a week due to severe dehydration. (There are also stories at the time that he was drugged by Jimmy Young's new handler, Blinky Palermo, who had recently got out of prison and was trying to get back into boxing. Those are some interesting stories if you ever get a chance to read them. George certainly paints the picture that he was someone "tripping" like mad. In fact, Blinky came under so much scrutiny that when Jimmy Young lost on points to Norton later that year, at the end of the broadcast, one of the announcers made some tongue-in-cheek comment about Blinky must not have been able to get to Norton.

Anyway, here's Foreman in the early 1980s talking about what happened "in his mind" in San Juan. The guys in the locker room said he was out until they carried him to the shower, and then George went crazy.

Regardless, Jimmy Young outslapping George that night didn't lead Foreman to retire.

Jump to the 3-minute mark, if interested.

This content is protected

 

I picked Foreman.

But it's a bit of a punt really, because I think this matchup, no matter when it took place, would have been a pick'em bout.

And, while you chose San Juan '77 for this fantasy scenario – essentially the end of Foreman's first career, as a jaded, wayward fighter – I don't think '77 for Holmes was quite the finished product at the beginning of the year. His own performance on the undercard was a modest affair against a guy who didn't belong in there (Horace Robinson).

Despite this being the 'Clancy-disrupted' version of Foreman, I still think he would have been a handful for that version of Holmes, and a tough outing for both men at that time and place. It's also worth noting that, at the time, Holmes management were not keen on a Foreman matchup, either.

 

Ali only edged Norton and Young lost to Norton.

Remind me how those fighters did against Foreman.

Well many people on this forum claim Foreman was never mentally the same after losing to Ali. So if we're going with the majority opinion then Foreman's mental state already wasn't 100 percent even prior to losing to Young.

Also whilst it's fair to acknowledge Foreman was effected by the heat i think people forget it's not mutually exclusive to Foreman.

Young is not from a hot climate and he had no advantage fighting Foreman in the sweltering heat so both fighters had to deal with it.

Whatever the reason for Foreman's retirement was. He still lost pretty clearly on points to Young IMO.

So i think assuming Foreman is a big favourite based on a loss to Young is not the safest prediction.

And as i've said countless times i don't know why you keep assuming Holmes would be exactly the same against Foreman.

Again i find it baffling that you don't think a fighter wouldn't have a different mindset and preparation fighting against the biggest challenge of their career, compared to fighting against an unremarkable opponent.

Also you're not taking into account how the fight would play out stylistically.

Holmes wouldn't be trying to take out Foreman he would be looking to win on points using his jab and boxing skills.

Foreman himself engaged in a cagey tactical affair with Young for the first 6 rounds with very little happening in the fight.

So the pace of the fight in the sweltering heat would suit the boxer more so than it would suit the puncher.

I'm not trying to change your mind i just don't understand why you don't think fighting against the best opponent of your career. Wouldn't have no impact in regards to how a fighter approaches a fight.

Assuming Holmes has the same mindset fighting against an unremarkable opponent as he would fighting against someone like Foreman makes no sense to me at all.

And again i don't see how you think Holmes magically improved in the span of say like 4 months.

Holmes's fight against Ibar Carrington just 4 months prior to fighting Shavers was hardly a stand out performance. And that fight gave absolutely no indication that Holmes was going to go on and dominate Shavers and fight a great fight vs Norton.

You'd have to assume that Holmes simply rose to the occasion when he finally got his first big fight of his career.

 

I recall Cosell repeatedly expressing amazement at the transformation of Holmes. Seconded by Ken Norton. But it wasn't just a case of Holmes waking up and deciding to put the effort in. He was nothing if not an ambitious fighter from the outset, with the heavyweight championship in his sights, and your not going to achieve that objective with half measures at any point along the way.

It was more a case of Holmes being visibly sharper, varying his attack, having much more control in his distance management and lateral movement and his use of the ring was markedly improved.

Maybe Holmes could have raised his game a year earlier in this speculative scenario, but I don't think we can assume that he would have, and I actually doubt it, given where he was at the beginning of '77.

 

There's a notion that Mike Tyson folds whenever someone shows he doesn't fear him, Ken Norton gets decked by any boxer with a hard punch, and any clever mover befuddles George Foreman. Perhaps those notions require scrutiny.

 

All I'm saying MM is that if Holmes is fighting George Foreman instead of Horace Robinson.

His mindset and preparation will be totally different given how big fight of a fight and how big of a challenge Foreman would be at that time.

I'm assuming we'd see a better version of Holmes given that he'd have to rise the occasion and he'd know it.

 

I think Holmes stops him late and it wouldn't be particularly close at the time.

 

As to the notion re Tyson - I think the belief was/is that fighters who already had already displayed the tools to trouble or perhaps even defeat Mike were fatally missing the necessary intestinal fortitude component and/or the desire to actually win against Mike as opposed to merely surviving.

Douglas obviously had a terrific skillet going into Tokyo but it all would’ve ultimately gone for nought had he not been so singularly minded in his for better or worse efforts to win the fight.

The irony for Buster was that he wasn’t always so mentally locked on and prepared for fights against much lesser opponents than Mike.

 

For me Holmes wasn't the fighter Young was at this point at any rate. Young was a damn good fighter at the time and wasn't afraid of punchers.

 

That’s the thing re the Young fight. George himself was not mentally right and that fight, though of great credit to Jimmy, wasn’t all about what Young did - rather, there was a lot that Foreman didn’t do but could’ve done that contributed to the complexion and outcome.

George certainly didn’t throw a ton
during the fight (also read: he certainly didn’t throw anywhere near enough punches in the earlier rounds).

The “new” Foreman was far too preoccupied with posturing rather than doing what he did best.

All the same, he was still burning his tank fast - likely due to a combination of the heat, being too angry/too tight and actually also due to keeping a less natural
lid on himself.

He almost had Young out with a single left hook in round 7 - but, relative to Foreman’s ideal mode of fighting, it was a case of too little too late, George’s tank was already somewhat depleted.

Young was also more defensively adept/responsible than Holmes but of course Larry had greater offensive tools.

Therefore, saying IF George couldn’t KO/stop Young (and Foreman almost did same anyway) then he sure isn’t doing same to Larry isn’t necessarily a logical deduction.

As to fighters evolving, there can be cases where they are so close to best but yet still so far in terms of material, just prior to, performances.

See Ali’s performance vs Cooper 1 relative to Ali’s performance vs Liston 1 for perhaps one good example of a major leap in development and evolution.

However, that same example could allow for the contribution of Ali’s own greater focus, seriousness and prep going into a fight against a far more formidable opponent in Sonny Liston.

I tend to think Roy Williams may be a bit underrated. He did have a good jab and employed same very well against Larry but that jab was strangely less prominent in his fight vs Shavers, IIRC.

At any rate, Roy did make things difficult for Larry at times and though Holmes went the 10 round distance. he def. showed some signs of fatigue, so he wasn’t yet fully attuned to fighting much beyond that distance, let alone a whole 15 rounds which he did fight to more than viably, later in the piece.

Against the diluted post Zaire version of Foreman, even Norton would’ve had a good shot at lasting several rounds longer - just as a very shop worn Frazier did.

The compounding problem there would’ve been Norton being availed of more time to offload on George himself - though when the dust settled, I think George would’ve still come away with the KO victory - but not so much a lock outcome as it was against pre Zaire Foreman.

This is def. an under over betting type fight for Foreman imo.

If Foreman literally fought as reservedly as he did against Young, Larry has a good chance for a win but it’s a valid argument that Holmes own fully fledged stamina might not have been quite up to speed at that point in time.

However, whether it be likely or not, IF ‘77 Foreman opted for a seek and destroy approach against Holmes, I wouldn’t discount an early to mid round KO/stoppage in Foreman’s favour.

Oops, this post ran longer than I had planned.

Tolstoy ain’t got nothing on me!

 

Napoleon said the moral is the physical as 3 is to 1. I would amend that to the mental to the physical is as 3 is to 1. George's head was not in a good place the evening he fought Jimmy Young.

 

I should add that this is an excellent post.

If I may, I’ll just elaborate on my own take - anchoring myself in the core truths efficiently and perfectly expressed in your own post.

Sometimes certain concepts/beliefs are locked in, wrapped up and neatly tied up with a bow, never to be revisited again.

Rather, instead of due redress, such concepts/beliefs are replayed over and over as an accepted and iron clad truth - even when misguidedly so.

FWIW, despite the punches he took from supernatural punchers like Foreman and Shavers, Ken didn’t actually have the 10 count tolled over him - while not viable to continue, he still actually finished those fights on his feet, with the ref calling a halt.

As to the Cooney KO, Norton took several more block buster punches whilst in the most vulnerable of positions and after he was technically down.

Of course he didn’t have a granite chin but he still took the shots of Ali and Holmes very and certainly wasn’t as chinny as many might have him.

As to clever boxer types, by definition, they are meant to and do give everyone trouble.

Peralta was a very clever boxer type but a very young George still beat him twice and more emphatically the second time around.

Ali boxed well against Foreman but the strategy that saw Ali beat Foreman wasn’t all about outboxing George.

Foreman vs Young? Well, again, that’s what Young did against several top tier fighters of varied styles and he was also fighting a relatively impaired Foreman as compared to the prime version.

 

Early days yet my friend.

Metaphorically, we’ve reached about round 4 relative to full count polling.

Yes, Larry is doing well, boxing cautiously (dare I say, leerily?) and building points but George still has gas in the tank.

Foreman has rung Larry’s bell a few times with not quite flush shots but the full brunt of George’s power draws ever closer to the point of Holmes’ chin.

Judge Andre, always completely impartial and impervious to bribes (up to a certain threshold, of course - after which all bets on my propriety are OFF - lol) has just scored a round for George which may signal
a significant momentum swing.

Then again, the offcialisation of my own pick may cause some to have even greater conviction in their selection of Larry. Haha.

Let’s sit back and see how this continues to unpack.