88' Tyson vs Prime Holmes

I could definitely see this scenario.

 

The way to think about this is to think about Tyson against Tillis and Tucker, and then multiply that by a significant factor.

Prime Holmes was something to marvel. He was quick, smart, skilled, and durable. And he was very hard to hit cleanly. Tyson would get frustrated early and shut down.

 

You geniunely believe that the Ali who boxed circles around Sonny Liston and exhausted George Foreman could not deal with Mike Tyson, the man who couldn't find a way to prevail against Buster Douglas and Evander Holyfield?

Tyson was a great and exciting fighter, but let's rein in the enthusiasm just a wee bit.

 

You have to reasonably consider that Tyson was 19 years of age and with less than 20 pro bouts when he fought James " quick " Tillis, yet dominated him from top to bottom despite. Tucker was a good fighter, but one who's style was very dissimilar to Larry Holmes, and was a man who fought to survive rather than win. He managed to take perhaps 3 rounds away from Tyson.. I don't think either of those bouts illustrate why Holmes would have beaten Tyson. In fact there are probably more such examples from Holmes' career such as the Snipes, Weaver and Shavers bouts, that would better explain favoring Tyson. I can't guarentee that it would happen that way, but on the surface, it certainly looks like it could be the case.

 

Or you can think about this by thinking about Holmes against Snipes and Shavers, and multiply that by a significant factor :good

 

I think Larry would fine a way to win against Tyson, get him to the later rounds and stop him late or win a ud.

 

James Tillis, Mitch Green, Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker and Razor Ruddock all held, mugged and went the distance with Tyson. A prime Holmes has the skills, heart and brain to beat him but it would be a very tough bout .

 

I never said it was better. I just said what actually happened.

Holmes started throwing jabs in the third round. He was more successful in those moments than he was when he stopped moving. The commentator at the time even mentioned that's what he needed to do. How can you argue that it was both his dancing that got him caught AND that it was him not dancing that did it ? It's one or the other.

That says more about how bad Mercer could be than it does about how far gone Larry was.

 

Ray Leonard commentating from ringside: "Look...look at the jab, look at the jab from Larry Holmes...it's starting to stick, snap out..." - 4th round.

But I'll refrain from comparing that Holmes to a prime version.

 

Yes, Tyson was 19 against Tillis...Holmes was 38 against Tyson and hadn't fought for a long time. Neither is indicative of anything. That's my point.

I thought this was a prime for prime match up? Who cares what they were doing at the same stage in their careers.

I posted because of the inconsistency. Tyson was getting knocked out by a fringe contender/journeyman at 24. At 31 he was being humbled by a blown up Cruiserweight. You can't take into consideration one set of failings and not the other. Otherwise it just looks like you made your mind up and then tried to legitimise it with some kind of reverse engineering analysis. Holmes getting slammed by Snipes is a salient point but not if you don't counterbalance it with Tyson's shortcomings.

These were both great HWs.

As regards Tucker. You didn't say it. I didn't accuse you of saying it. Calm down, mate. I think you're taking this out of proportion.

 

Larry stopped running as in running to simply avoid contact/punishment and running from the fight, tying up whenever Tyson got close.

That's nonsense. Larry also won 4, some people have said 5 rounds against a peak Holyfield years later as well, I guess Evander's bad too.

 

The actual Holmes - Tyson fight has no bearing on this one. I mean how the hell would peak Holmes go vs the Tyson of Williams or McBride.

 

To gage prime Holmes/Tyson off their fight is half baked. Larry was 37 coming off of six weeks of training after 18 months of inactivity against the best Tyson that ever lived. Holmes took it for the money and knew going in he made a big mistake. Tyson did crush him but I feel it is even more disproportionate than Louis/Marciano. At least Louis was active going into that one.

 

I don't know if anyone is just using the Holmes-Tyson fight to pick this one. The only reason I mentioned it is to illustrate Holmes weakness to the right hand which their fight showed. Holmes was 38 years old though, so obviously he would me more competitive in a prime for prime matchup.

Holmes wasn't past it against Snipes/Shavers though which showed his achilles heel.

 

Watch the fight again, he's snapping out jabs in the third as well.