Holmes looked awful against Tyson

Yeah, this is true.

 

I'm not sure that I really understand the point of this thread. Holmes comes back from the dead at thirty eight years of age and after 2 years of inactivity, yet he's supposed to look good against a peaking Tyson?

 

Tyson shouldn't have been peaking at that age. IMO Tyson never really had a prime.

 

Get rid of your trick questions and deceptive methods and I may do quite well on the final exam.

Just think.....Dr. Magoo.......

 

What 38 year old who was staging a comeback after a layoff would do better?

Holmes did all right vs Tyson. At times, you could see why a prime Holmes would be a load for Tyson. I think this was one of Tyson's best performances in his absolute prime.

Tyson capped many younger ranked people faster than he stopped Holmes. Let the record show that Holmes took the warrior's path. He did not quit, or look for a mercy stoppage. He went out on his shied.

 

I must confess, the idea does seem tempting at times. The trolls around here seem to have a lot more fun than the posters who waste time and energy refuting their nonsense.

 

In my own personel opinion, tyson would have done the same thing to holmes even if holmes had been in his prime. holmes was always a big time sucker for that same right hand, and unlike shavers and snipes.....tyson had finishing skills......some of the best in history......and he had what it takes to take larry outta their and I think the result would be similiar.

 

Holmes would poorly prepared and old. Tyson was the exact opposite.

 

Exactly, I think he did well when you put it into perspective.

 

Perhaps not to the extent that he did fighting an old Holmes, but I'm inclined to agree with you that Tyson would still win prime for prime. Holmes had a habit of dropping his hand a little too much (particularly when he jabbed), and Tyson would still have enough of a quickness advantage to slip it and make him pay for that with the right hook. And, as you said...the finishing skills were ruthless. I'm gaining more respect for Holmes as time goes on, but I still think Tyson would stop.

 

Come on Suzie, this version of Holmes was running on about 35%. Peak Holmes was a different proposition. Holmes lasting as long as he did gives credence he would have been a handful peak.

 

35 or 100, he probably would have still lost. Tyson (at that point) was better than any opposition Holmes had faced. Holmes never beat anybody of importance while in his prime, why expect him to beat Tyson once his prime was over?