1988 Larry Holmes v. 1979 Earnie Shavers

Considering he barely survived Shavers in 79'? I think he gets poleaxed.

 

Holmes got careless once and nearly paid for it, but other than that, both their fights were fairly one-sided. I think he'd still have enough nous to see off Shavers.

 

He won the vast majority of those rounds in both fights. But he still nearly got KO'd and now we'd be looking at a much slower-less durable Holmes. I think Earnie has a better chance of landing more often.

 

Earnie nails Larry in this scenario

 

Shavers has a better chance, but I still think he loses. Was Holmes less durable? Holmes had another 20 or so fights after Tyson, fought on to the age of 50 and no one ever came close to doing what Tyson did to him. I'm not sure anyone even dropped him, unless you count Butterbean.

Holmes may be slower, but Shavers was never particularly fast to begin with, and his stamina and durability were always in question. He was beatable at every stage of his career by lesser fighters than the 38 year old Holmes. A few years earlier he lost to Bob Stallings. In the next couple of years he lost to Bernardo Mercado and Tex Cobb. Shavers might land more but even the much quicker and more skilful Tyson needed several attempts to put Holmes down for the count, and Earnie was never the best of finishers.

I still say Holmes has enough durability, skill and ring savvy to see him off. At 42 he was still good enough to do a number on Mercer.

 

The thing about Holmes' fight with Mercer is that at that point Holmes had had fights and rounds under his belt - the Holmes that fought Tyson (the Holmes in the match-up suggested by the OP) didn't). Further, when you haven't fought for a long spell like this, taking punches can be more of a shock to the system & punch resistance can lessen - this could be a factor in this match.

Yes, Shavers did lose to the likes of Stallings much earlier. and Cobb & Mercado later, but the earlier and later incarnations of Shavers are arguably not the Shavers of '79, who was in the form, condition and top confidence of his career after the win over Norton.

However, the versions of Holmes & Shavers that the OP gives us an intriguing match up, nearly 50/50 imo.

If Shavers catches Holmes as he did in '79 I think he may well get Larry. If Larry can get into the fight and get sharper as the fight progresses he has a chance. If Earnie comes out as he did versus Norton - it's Earnie early or Larry late.

Gun to my head - Holmes has a history of winning most of the big ones, Shavers not so much. I think Holmes' more reliable winning mentality probably wins through.

 

What world class punchers did Holmes face between 1991-2002, other than Ray Mercer who was no Shavers and had him badly rocked in the first round, then never landing anything for the rest of the fight? You also have to factor that when Larry fought Tyson he was coming off of two years of inactivity without even a tuneup against a tomato can ( which was most of what he fought in his comeback anyway. ) Larry could still fight post Tyson, but he was vulnerable. Mentioning Shaver's defeats to Mercado and Cobb is moot given that both of those guys hit harder than Holmes and both had go through a punishing ordeal to beat him - something that Larry couldn't do in 1988. If Shavers was able to land that huge right hand that dropped a much fast and better conditioned Holmes in 1979, don't you think he could land that and then some in 1988? Do you think Holmes still had the conditioning to take that shot and get up? I doubt it..

 

Absolutely.. We also have to factor into the equation that Holmes was vulnerable to right crosses even in his prime, and to think of him going up against one of the most dangerous right hands of all time at 38 years of age and after a two year layoff is almost too sickening to think about.

 

Shavers knocks out the Holmes who fought Tyson.

 

Which world class boxers did Shavers KO at any stage of his career? Not many. And none as durable and difficult to KO as Holmes, even the older version. McCall and Holyfield may not have had Shavers power but they had good pop and an even older Holmes survived them pretty well. I don't believe Holmes was significantly improved at 42 compared with when he was 38, we just saw more of him and he wasn't fighting a peak Tyson.

In this match-up Shavers is 34, only four years younger than Holmes (and only three if you're counting the 1980 version who put Holmes down), so there's not going to be the vast gap in youth and ringwear that Holmes faced against Tyson.

I don't buy this idea that because Tyson KO'd Holmes in '88, Shavers would too. Tyson was light years ahead of Shavers in terms of speed, skill, finishing and ability to KO durable opposition. Against Tyson, Holmes got up twice and nearly survived that fourth round. Against a slower, wilder, less skilled and suspect stamina Shavers, chances are he does. Suddenly you have an arm-weary Shavers, thinking he's blown his chance against a man who's already beaten him pretty handily twice. And he does still have to land that punch. The older Holmes was a spoiler and more cautious. Perhaps he'll remember to jab before throwing an uppercut against someone with a booming right hand.

As you say, the intangible here is Holmes' ring rust and possible stamina issues. I doubt having ten fights against no hopers would have improved his chances much against Tyson, but it might come into play against Shavers. I still back Holmes though. He still has enough class to beat Earnie, and enough durability and savvy to ride out any storms.

 

How many did he KO? aside from an aged Ellis and a green Young? None. But he fought a prime Holmes, a more polished Jimmy young later, and an aged but still reigning Muhammad Ali and gave them all fits. He very nearly KO'd Holmes in the peak of his prime and Holmes was a man who was always subjected to getting tagged with rights. Putting a 38 year old Holmes who had been off for two years in with a 1979 version of Shavers would be a very bad move unless there was a title and a sh-tload of money on the line... Could Holmes pull it off? Maybe. But I don't know how you can pick him with such conviction and confidence under these circumstances.