78 to 82 Holmes a Nightmare for Tyson

Doesn't matter. My point was even on his best night he wasn't in a prime Holmes league.

 

What matters is where they were ranked when you actually beat them.

 

Simple math.

 

Which rivals Holmes wouldn't he have a chance against? Norton, Berbick?

 

"Prime Larry Holmes"? Prime Larry Holmes would have wiped Trevor Berbick out. Three rounds tops.

 

Are you trying to say that someone who knocks an opponent out early is by virtue of that result better than someone who easily outpoints the over 15 rounds?

Because we both know we can come up with dozens upon dozens of examples where it didn’t quite work out that way — i.e. Foreman blasted out Frazier but Ali went 2-1 vs Frazier and never put him down. Yet Ali > George.

 

Agreed. Geraldo and Duran went the distance with Hagler while Hearns knocked them out in a combined 3 rounds. So does that mean Hearns beats Hagler?

 

He didn't. He wasn't even close to finishing. And he called Trevor the strongest fighter he'd ever fought.

Who among the boxers Holmes defeated was in a different league than Tyson? Norton 78? Shavers?

 

Someone needs to tell this guy, that's not how boxing works lol.

 

Was Buster in “a different league than Tyson”?

Or from the perspective you seem to be seeking, was he in a different league than all of Larry’s opponents?

 

I think he wasn't playing, as evidenced by his career. He lost to three boxers Tyson defeated; his best opponent was the green McCall; he fared poorly against Holyfield.

But we're not talking about Buster, we're talking about Tyson and Holmes. Which boxers who fought Holmes were in a different league than Tyson? Which of Holmes's opponents from 1978-1982 would Tyson have been hopeless against?

Is my question too difficult?

 

I guess I was being too subtle.

Yours isn’t a difficult question — it’s an impossible one for anyone but you, because you’re the only one who knows how you define what “league” Tyson was in.

By my reckoning, he was in a league below Buster Douglas, being as how Big Bus ragdolled him (except for one punch, from which he pounded his fist on the canvas, got up and recovered to resume the ragdolling) and beat the stuffing out of him.

If your definition of Tyson’s “league” is similar to mine, then I’d list Ken Norton, Earnie Shavers, Gerry Cooney, Tim Witherspoon and Mike Weaver as surely in Tyson’s league — in that they’re at least on par with Douglas career-wise, and probably throw in Randall Cobb being that he lost a majority decision to Douglas (which is a much better result than Mike had).

 

You don't have to be subtle, jyou're not on a date with a girl , just factual and objective.
I'm not defining Holmes' or Tyson's league. In my opinion, they played in the same league, but Tyson dominated it and Holmes didn't. Larry, however, played in it much longer.
The theory about the league was created by user Robert Unruguien, but he didn't explain what he meant. I understand you will.

If Buster was better than Tyson, why did he lose to three fighters Mike defeated? Why, in fighting since 1982, has he never won a title, while Tyson did so three times and defended his belt six times?

 

Buster never won a title?

If beating someone head to head when both are in their physical primes doesn’t make the winner better … what does?

During Larry Holmes’ prime, no one whom Holmes fought was in his class. He beat them all. Tyson, on the other hand, lost in his prime to a guy who had an otherwise undistinguished career.

 

Nope. One of us is sticking to the topic of facing top competition during the 3-4 year stretch, the other one is trying to move the goalpost cause he can't argue the original point anymore.