Holmes says he would have beaten Ali in his prime

I don't dispute that the best version of Ali (ie: pre exile) beats him in a competitive fight, but to say at any stage that it's going to be easy is silly. Post exile is a toss up IMO.

 

For some reason, I find this hilarious. :rofl

Nothing really to add - I too think Larry presents Muhammad with a lot of problems. I can see him winning at least one, but possibly two, out of three against Ali.

 

The only thing i'm wondering here is if the "Chinese" was referring to food or to scantily clad female company.

 

I meant food, though it's open to question (depending how nice looking the oriental laydee's happen to be). :yep

 

I would go with Ali ,but not by much,Eddie Futch picked Holmes over Ali prime for prime ,sofor Larry to say he would win isn,t outrageous to me,I think it would allways be a very close thing.

 

as if Ali would of pasted Holmes in his prime although Holmes is underated

 

like in 1980?:yep

 

Holmes is full of ****.

 

That's very harsh as Ali was totally shot, ill and should have called it a day a few years prior (no reflection as to how a prime matchup would unfold between the two). I mean up until '77 or so.

 

When did Marciano ever face a true all time great boxer who was in his prime? You also mentioned Holmes loss to a lightheavyweight in an earlier post. Is this what you would call the best rendition of Holmes? By the way, that lightheavyweight was 6'3", 200 LBS, undefeated, and 28 years old. I'm not even so sure that Rocky ever beat a fighter who had so much going for him all at one time. With all due respect I make no convictions about Holmes beating Marciano or vice versa, but your assessment is based on observations that are somewhat one sided.

 

A prime Ali would win a non-disputed UD, or late round TKO. Holmes is slightly overrated by most, greatly overrated by himself, IMO.

 

I continue to see a quite beatable Holmes in his signature fights: a green (no pun intended) Cooney was in the fight deep into the 13th: Holmes had a good jab, but lacked killer power and on the other hand was always vulnerable to power shots to the body and head.

Holmes will go to heaven smarting from being underrated. He was a great champion and good man, but, compared to the '60s Ali, he was a couple of notches below.

 

Eddie Futch also suggests all of Ali's opponents were handpicked in the Ali biography.

Nobody is honest in boxing.

 

I agree that Holmes is worthy of being a top 10 guy, but I can't see him being rated on par with Muhammad Ali or even beating him in his prime either. To tell you the truth, I'm not even 100% sold on the idea that he'd even beat Norton had Ken been about 4 years younger, or for that matter if he was even deserving of his decision win over a 15-0 Witherspoon. Sure, he showed that he could beat a guy like Mercer when he was 42 years old and on the comeback trail, but hindsite tells us that Mercer's career didn't exactly flourish as some predicted. At one point, I had Holmes as high as #4 on my all time list, but after carefully studying his career and listening to the opinions of other fans over the past year, I have strongly reconsidered. I personally think that Holmes belongs on the lower end of the top 10.

 

Great minds think alike, my fellow Chicagoan.

It is obvious a banged-up, slower, older Norton gave a prime, hungry Holmes everything he could handle; they were very close in overall ability.

And, yes, he is also in my lower top 10, as he is in many others' Top Ten lists. Not bad for a regular guy from Easton with the heart of a champ. Too bad he usually put his foot in his mouth.