Larry Holmes Interview

In holmes/ali era id say tyson does pretty well for himself.

Easily crushes the likes of Mathis, Ellis, quarry, weaver, Cooney, etc. Stops bonavena and Chuvalo on their feet in intense wars. Gets off the floor to stop lyle in 7. Wins ugly lopsided decisions over bugner and Terrel.

He'd struggle with Witherspoon. Hard to say who wins that one.

In a best of 3, both at their best, he beats Frazier 2/3 if not 3/3. Fraziers only chance is to be defensively responsible, survive the early onslaught, and drag Tyson into deep waters. Unlikely but not impossible.

He kos Norton with 8 or less.

Both prime Holmes and Ali would have their hands full with Tyson. Holmes could sometimes get lethargic and monotonous and tysom could time him despite his blazingly fast hands and long reach. Holmes cannot make a single mistake and must force tyson to respect him early. Over 12, tyson could win at least 1/3 if not 2/3 or gate a ko around 7-9 if he catches Holmes along the ropes and doesnt let him off the hook. Over 15 i expect holmes to take it or even stop him late if he isn't too damaged.

Ali would be trickier, especially 60'e Ali. Although he has a devastating hook and a good chin, Ali's mental advantage and latenl round stamina could be major X factors. He had better footwork than Holmes and a better chin. Ali usually wins this 60/40 especially if he gets in tysons head. But it would be an intense war throughout.

Foreman KO's Tyson in 4-5. By far one of his worst h2h matchups. He'd have a punchers chance and may deck foreman but he's not beating him in a slug fest, ever. Tyson can't fight backing up, can't win a decision. He'd hage to blitz foreman and not let up. If he cant stop foreman in 3, he aint stopping him ever. And like Ali there'd be the intimidiation x factor. I give tyson a 30% chance at best.

 

I get what you mean I often wondered about Frazier - Tyson but I don't know if Frazier would have been able to hit Tyson clean, prime vs prime, while I'm sure Tyson would have hit Frazier clean.
Frazier was a renowned slow starter and the speed and defence of Tyson I think could be too much, even though Tyson doesn't have the pure thudding power of a George Foreman, the result might look similar.
Then again like you say, the longer it goes, it's almost certain to favour Frazier. I just can't see it going to the scorecards.

 

Think people tend to put Tyson on this pedestal that he’s some unbeatable freak in his prime. Most of the top ten HWs ever looked like unbeatable freaks in their primes. Tyson is a stronger version of Patterson with a better chin. That being said I see any of the top ten HWs ever putting up a fight and most beating him. The Holmes fight wasn’t very impressive. Was a snooze fest till Tyson connected on a solid straight right. I don’t see Tyson beating Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Frazier, Liston or Marciano. And the more I watch of him the more confident I feel in that. That being said he could compete and win in any era if the right punch lands. Explosive force worthy of a top ten ranking.

 

The fighters Holmes avoided and shared titles or struggled with Tyson went out and cleaned up - Pinklon, M.Spinks, - Tyson would have destroyed any version of Witherspoon & quickly Norton quicker - Dokes and Page and Coetzee could offer some issues but I think Tyson prevails - Holmes on the other hand had trouble with right hand punchers

Larry is a good dude but his ego is stronger than his sense of reality

Glad he gave Louis props but he is correct Louis would beat any version of Holmes and so would Marciano - Frazier may also be favored.

The younger version of Foreman - Larry had the style to win if he could avoid the right hand and take Big G into deep water but Holmes had that achilles heel (right hands) so not an easy task

 

Well, the Tillis fight consistently knocks the invincible Mike idea out. Mike showed some of the weaknesses that would later be capitalized upon by Douglas.

Granted, it may have just been an off night, but Tillis really did NOT have the kind of chin to last all those rounds. Whenever I see that fight I can't help but see Tillis in the shape of his life, determined to win. It was certainly the most reputation-enhancing fight Quick ever had.

If it had been Frazier, Mike would have been great for a few rounds but Joe had way too much championship heart for Mike, not to mention he just never quit with the hook. Joe got knocked down, but got back up. Mike...whenever Mike got knocked down it was usually, mostly over.

FOTC Joe was unbeatable imo.

 

Tyson had been a pro for a whopping 13 months when he fought Tillis. Have a look at what other greats were doing at the 13 month mark including Holmes. Tillis was his first step toward upper tier opponents. In the big scheme of things Tillis proved next to nothing. I have little doubt Tyson would have wiped him out 8 or less fights later.

 

And the Tillis form going into the Tyson fight was losing 4 of his previous 5 fights. And 3 or 4 of those via ko.
and he was fighting Mike in his backyard. There are reasons why Tillis was a 10-1 underdog.

 

It’s odd that some people compare every fighter to each other. Tyson had a solid amateur career. Marciano had basically no amateur career. Maybe AJ was a lot better then Tyson because who he was fighting by his 20 fight? That logic doesn’t equate. Tyson probably could have won the title by his 20 fight. He was that good. Truth is it’s easy for many of these guys to look good until they face they someone just as good. I used to think teddy atlas was just being biased saying Tyson would fold/coast in sparring to guys that could stand up to him but u know what he was right. And that is Tyson’s biggest weakness

 

Actually I have to give this one to @JohnThomas1 because I forgot about how early this was in Mike's career, and I do agree Quick would have been out in two rounds even a year later.

I kind of sidestepped the fact that Quick went 15 not so easy rounds with then-second-best-heavy-in-the-world Mike Weaver (whose hook wasn't particularly far in power from Mike's...if at all). He was indeed waaaay more experienced.

Thanks for schooling me on that, John.

 

And George was the type where when he got too drunk he fell down. 90s Larry and George quite possibly goes the distance in favor of Larry (George seemed incapable of being knocked down later in his career)...but 1980 Holmes makes 1972 Foreman into a swoll up mess by the ninth, then a staggering, helpless hulk stopped by the 11th.

 

Leading up to the fight with Tyson, I remember Larry Holmes said that if he did lose to Mike, he wouldn't be champ for long because he will crash and burn.
Not a good thing to say, but boy was he right.

This content is protected

Eddie was on point!

 

It's amusing, but Larry said nothing about f the fans. He never would. He was specifically about the promoters, Marciano, Spinks.

It doesn't change the fact that what he said is hard to respect, even if he is my favorite fighter he said ignorant things. Marciano might not have been as great as Larry but he was a great fighter who deserves respect, like any great fighter imo.

I think Holmes was devastated losing to a light heavyweight...especially Leon's brother. The funny thing is, had all things been equal except Larry being several years younger, Michael quite possibly would have lost similarly to his brother against Larry lol.