I recently watched Holmes vs Spinks II. I must say Holmes did look good in the rematch. He fought at a relatively fast pace, was putting on the pressure, many jabs, body shots with both hands, the uppercut was there, well conditioned (able to hurt Spinks in the last round). There was no doubt in my mind that Holmes deserved the decision. I think had the judges giving him the deserved decision, this Holmes version would have been perceived differently. This Holmes was better than the Joshua we saw against Usyk. Now, that not surprisingly Holmes emerged as the clear winner in the other thread prime Holmes vs Usyk. How do you the 35 year old Holmes against the similar aged Usyk? IMO, it would be a close fight but I slightly favour Holmes.
I would still favor Holmes but it would be much closer, perhaps even controversial. He fought a much better fight in the rematch, attacking Spinks and imposing his will. Now the Usyk of the Glowaki....He's a clear winner here. I'm not sure why others on this forum keep hyping the version who beat AJ. The Usyk of 5 years ago had exceptional speed and movement compared to his present self.
