Just Watched Holmes v Mercer, Question?

With the same Tyson no way in hell. He didnt have the legs and handspeed needed to keep Tyson off of him. Mercer wasnt really green either, he was an olympic gold medalist, and Holmes was a boxer not a brawler. Mercer was just lazy and didnt take his pro career seriously. Thats why he blew against Jesse Ferguson when the dumbass was guaranteed a shot at Riddick Bowe, and tried to bribe him during the fight.
Just different kinds of fights.

 

No, because Tyson isn't the hot and cold vastly inferior Mercer. That and Tyson might just beat any Holmes

 

No, because Tyson in 1988 was very good, whereas Mercer was always a bit crap.

Whatever Holmes made up for with tune-ups and activity, he probably lost with his advancing age and increasing fat levels.

I think Mercer just never could box well. And his punching wasn't generally devastating.

 

Hell no. :nono

Holmes was even slower in the footwork & handspeed departments. Tyson would still nail him flush with a nuclear righthand, & once Holmes was badly hurt or dropped (which would happen early), it wouldn't be long before the ferocious Tyson finished him with a vicious nuclear barrage, no matter how many times he gets up.

 

Holmes was another guy who tried to fight back. He boxed well for a couple rounds but Tyson closed the gap and really made Larry stand in with him. I cant remember seeing Larry move around the ring like he did in those first two rounds ever again in his comeback, he was flying. The righthand that Tyson hit him with was an excellent shot, and Larry had no chance to recover. He just got caught by a big shot, its ashame he could never admit that. Its amazing he even got up from it.

 

Mercer had a tremendous upside but as lefthook31 stated "was just lazy and didnt take his pro career seriously"

 

Even before Tyson nailed him, Holmes was so obviously rusty and misfiring that the announcing team made note of it. Against Mercer, he was a very different animal, not attempting to recapture his youth with his legs, but suckering Ray into the corners, slipping and countering. That's not the style Tyson was prepared for in 1988, and was different enough that I believe Larry could indeed have lasted the distance on his feet. Tyson-Holmes in 1992 would have looked similar to Holyfield-Holmes.

 

Mercer had something that should have carried him much further in the mid 90s. He was coming into an era where he would be facing guys with less movement. He had a good jab and decent boxing skills and was a solid chinned guy, so he should have been able to outbox and win more fights. Id classify him as a better version of Hasim Rahman, but like Rahman his lack of fitness lost him fights he should have won easily.

 

Sorry, I didn't read your question carefully enough. I was putting a 1992 Holmes in with 1988 Tyson.

If Holmes had had 5 - 6 tune-ups in 1987 (like he did for Mercer), he probably could have got himself into better shape for Tyson, and got his weight down a few pounds lighter.
He would have been sharper. And he would have been more confident when the bell rang.
He might have given Tyson more trouble - landed more punches, avoided a few more. But Tyson would have still got to him within 7 or 8 rounds.

Truth is, Holmes was just too old and too slow, from about 1985 onwards.
He was 38 years old, 'nuff said.

 

Dont remember that, will have to review the fight again.

You mean against Mercer he could be a different animal. The pace of the fight creates a lot more chances for a slower man than the pace of a Tyson fight.

Interesting, a stationary target could slip and bob and weave and make Tyson miss.. Not sure I agree with that and I think inevitably the same outcome happens if the fight happens that way. I think the best chance Larry had was what he was trying to do in the early rounds and how he would have fought Tyson in his prime.

 

Yes, I think so. Fighters are never better when they aren't active and sharp, and inactivity hurts any fighter, but especially so with an older one. The Larry Holmes that faced Tyson was not sharp. He hadn't fought in nearly two years. Hell, a young Holmes wouldn't have been as good with a 1.5 year layoff, let alone an aged, slowing down, and less motivated one. Now, I'm not saying an aged Holmes wins by any means, but do I think he would have done better - yes - if he had several tune-up fights first.

 

I agree. Holmes baited Mercer to come to him, even posing for the camera and shouting "I'm not Tommy Morrison!"

Holmes didn't move around with Mercer as much as he did with Tyson because he didn't have to.

 

Possibly, as I said, Holmes just got caught with a nasty shot. Had he not, its conceiveable he makes it the 12 rounds but Tyson was going to put pressure and speed on Holmes he probably never experienced. I remember thinking Holmes would probably make it deeper than he did against Tyson, but he just got nailed early.