Frazier was great in '71. The '73 Joe was not the same fighter, less training and interest, and lost to Foreman. Foreman never fought the "real" Joe Frazier. Tyson was great in '88. The '90 Tyson was not the same fighter, less training and interest, and lost to Douglas. Douglas never fought the "real" Mike Tyson. Marciano didn't fight the "real" Joe Louis. Holmes didn't fight the "real" Ali. I guess the point is that it is very tough to determine what fighters will do against other fighters when they are all at the top of their game.
It depends upon how advanced the older fighter's decline is. For example,Ali was far gone when he was beaten by Holmes. Same applies to Holmes when being stopped by Tyson. Joe Frazier,on the other hand,was only SLIGHTLY over the hill against Foreman,so it still gave us a good idea how a prime for prime match up would have panned out.
Holmes wasnt that far gone when he fought Tyson. He may have had some ring rust but the guy fought on for 14 more years and only lost three more times, once to Holy in a competetive bout, once to McCall in a competetive bout, and once to Nielson in a robbery. The idea that Holmes was far gone when he fought Tyson is usually brought up by Tyson's detractors to take credit away from Tyson for being the only man to stop Holmes and brought up by Holmes as an excuse for his performance. In reality Tyson had been schooled since he was about 12 years old on how to beat Larry Holmes and had the perfect combination of style, power, and durability to do so. Bad matchup for Holmes which made him look worse than he actually was.
Tyson had an outrageous advantage over Holmes. In that further 14 years how many times did Larry chose an active rated fighter half as fast as Tyson was then? Larry and old george both worked out that in order to have a successful comeback you can give away age but you cant give away rust, strength and age against the top fighters. All old Holmes had over Tyson was height and reach, the experience and weight wasn't even that much of a factor because Tyson had everything else over him. Larry was literally dug up for Tyson. He wasn't rated, nor had he won a fight for several years. It was a bad match and a liberty that it was alowed. Can't blame Tyson though, old Larry was made to order.
My point is that a prime Larry wouldnt have done much better. He might have lasted the distance but he wasnt going to beat Tyson.
Holmes had lost A LOT before he fought Tyson. It wasn't a case of "some ring rust." He was 38 years old. The Holmes that lost to Spinks and struggled against Williams (and even Witherspoon a couple of years before the Spinks fights) bore little resemblance to the late-70s/early-80s model that decimated Spinks, Shavers, Weaver, and Berbick. The fact that he lost so few fights after the Tyson fight is merely testament to how much better Holmes was than most of those he fought - even way off his peak, he was still better than they were.
Really? He decimated Weaver, Berbick, and Shavers? Because I seem to recall Holmes struggling like hell with Weaver, turning in a pedestrian points win over Berbick, and getting his head damn near knocked off by the vastly overrated Shavers. Isnt strange how the supposedly stellar Holmes always struggled with the best fighters he fought, ducked a ton of fighters and as a result contributed to the proliferation of titles in boxing and the heavyweight muddle (that Tyson cleaned up) in the 1980s? If you are really being realistic how are Holmes struggles with Weaver and Snipes any better than his gift decision victory over Witherspoon, or his struggles with Williams and others. Its no coincidence that when Holmes stepped up he looked less than impressive. The point is that some place him on a pedestal and pretend that he was completely shot when he fought Tyson. The reality is that while he wasnt prime he certainly wasnt shot and Tyson was a damn sight better than the guys Holmes was struggling with in his prime.
"Decimated" is probably an overstatement, but the close cards against Berbick were 11-4, and on one card, it was a shutout. He was ahead comfortably on all cards against Weaver when dropped and stopped him, he was also way ahead on points and stopped the "vastly overrated" Shavers who had just destroyed Norton and loss a fairly close decision to Ali. The Holmes of 79-81 was markedly better than the Holmes of 88. I wouldn't say he struggled with any of those guys. He lost 4 of 11 rounds to Weaver and stopped him in the 12th. Stylistically, he wasn't a Frazier or a Foreman or a Tyson who was trying or expecting to blow people out in a few rounds.
There can be all types of variables involved on where a fighter's at. Motivation, training, battle fatigue, other problems (outside of boxing), etc.
A prime Larry would improve on what Tony Tucker did with a bad hand against prime Tyson. Even Tyson admitted that. Tyson was a great fighter but he became champion before he developed into a real seasoned fighter. His youth speed and fast track through the ranks did not include the kind of fights Holmes had with foes like tiger Williams, Ernie Shavers and Ken Norton. On the way up Tyson had marvis Frazier, quick tillis and Berbick? When Holmes was defending against Shavers, Weaver, Leon Spinks and Cooney -guys who wanted to win, Tyson was getting faded has beens Tubbs, Holmes and Thomas who were not beating rated fighters. untested Biggs, Tucker and Bruno were less established and more relevant but no more so than say Cobb, Berbick, Ocassio and bey. For all King kept Dokes, Page and Coetzee away from Holmes there was nobody saying they could beat Holmes. It's not like Tyson fought everyone. Where was WItherspoon? Tyson losing to Douglas would have been like Holmes losing to Leon Spinks.
A fat out of shape Holmes came outa retirement to fight Tyson so ya he was that far off..He had no business getting in the ring with Tyson!...It was for the money and everyone knows it.
I have to agree that the fit & ready Tyson was all wrong for any version of Larry and beats him on Larry's best day give or take a round but it would have to be the fit & ready version of Tyson....King (Holmes) avoided lesser men
