Larry Holmes was the reason Tyson was over-rated

Larry Holmes knew about the fight at least 3 months prior to it happening, so if he wasn't in training that's his own fault.

He was old and 'rusty' though. I don't think anyone can seriously argue against the fact that he was well past his best.

 

Hasn't Holmes' since admitted that he initially refused to take the fight, when first asked by Don King; that he even said he couldn't beat Mike Tyson and only agreed to the bout when Don King offered him 'x' millions of dollars?

 

Then he shouldn't have taken the fight. This does not cover him with glory either.

 

Holmes took the fight for money, nothing else. He was a sucker for cold hard cash. All the years of moaning and hating on King went out the window when that much was offered out of no-where.

3 months isn't much time for someone who thought they would never fight again and had let themself go for almost two years. Don't get me wrong, Tyson would have stopped him regardless (he was way over the hill) but i do think he was fighting to a little bit higher standard later.

 

I doubt Larry Holmes was fighting better later on. Sure, he had some tune-ups and that should help if all other things being equal, but he was even older and even fatter, and had clearly let himself go even more in the years between.

The fact is 1988 Tyson was much better than 1992 Ray Mercer who lost to Holmes.
As for 1992 Holyfield, I thought Evander won the fight with Holmes clearly and showed a complete contempt for Holmes's punches which at times made Holmes look a bit better than he was. Holyfield was never quite as explosive or powerful as Tyson was anyway.

 

As said i have no doubt Tyson would have disposed of him regardless. He might have pulled it in Holmes prime for all we know. I still think Holmes timing got a bit better post Tyson.

 

Crazy post.

Larry was 38, out of shape, and inactive when he fought Tyson on one of Tyson's best nights. If you watch closely, you would see how a prime Holmes would have dealt with Tyson.

Tyson beat some guys Holmes had already beaten. Examples: Berbick, Spinks, Willaims, and Spinks. In all cases, Holmes faced the fresher fighter. Holmes also beat a dangerous Tim Witherspoon and Tyson would not touch him in the 1980's. Witherspoon was likely the 3rd best heavyweight of the 1980's after Holmes and Tyson.

Holmes narrowly outpointed Berbick? Wrong, he nearly shut him out!

 

I disagree. How much better can you get when you're 4 years older and over the age of 40? Feasting on jobbers does not put a fighter in better form especially when they're over the hill.

Mercer just had a better style suited for Larry's liking, as did Holyfield.

 

Horrendous post.

Holmes knew a fight with Tyson was in the works since mid 1986. In fact, if Tyson didn't enter the HBO tournament his opponent would've been Holmes. But Team Tyson copped a deal with HBO so Cayton and Jacobs promised Holmes first shot at the Undisputed Championship if Tyson won the tourney. Holmes was in shape, maybe a bit rusty and definitely past prime. Still, he was never obliterated like that before or since Tyson got to him.

A prime Holmes isn't flying around the ring. He'd sit down on his shots, set Tyson up and get countered to death and go out on his shield.

Sure you can say Holmes fought younger versions of the above. But fresher? You view them as being 'fresher' and I look at them as being inexperienced.

Berbick was coming off his career best win over Thomas before getting trounced by Tyson.

Spinks was coming off wins over Holmes, Tangstad and Cooney.

After gaining big fight experience in a losing effort against Holmes, The Truth picked up a KO win over Jesse Ferguson, a KO loss to Mike Weaver, a stoppage over Bert Cooper and a win over Berbick.

Why bring up Witherspoon when Tim got KO'd by Bonecrusher. He wins that and faces Tyson next. It's too bad he lost out on the Tyson sweepstakes. Tyson-Witherspoon would've been a marvelous fight for however long it lasts.

 

Well he had 5 fights in about 7 months leading into the Mercer fight so at least he was active. Holmes aged quite gracefully in the ring considering he was well past it many years earlier.

As far as Mercer's style, well Tyson is 5 times the fighter Mercer is, never mind about styles.

 

Holmes LOOKED horrible going into the Tyson fight,

 

Holmes took the Foreman route to get his title shot against Holyfield. Facing cannon fodder didn't really make him better, not at his age, did it? Sharper? Mmmm, maybe. He did fight a couple exhibitions prior to facing Tyson so he wasn't completely rusty. And he did look in shape, far better than the pudge who returned against Doc Anderson and onwards.

Yeah, that's basically what I meant when I said Mercer's style was more suitable for Holmes.

Larry didn't look that bad against Mike. He was flying around the ring like crazy and physically looked in good shape compared to his comeback 3-4 years later.

 

How so?

Holmes did have a fearful look stepping in the ring that night. Not sure if that's what you meant?

 

No, he looked flabby, even his jab lacked snap.

 

Holmes hadn't looked much good since the David Bey fight in March 1985, and Bey was tailor-made for him really. I thought Carl Williams beat him. Spinks did too, the first time for sure. Spinks rematch was debatable, i'd give it to Holmes, but Holmes should have knocked him out really. That was the best Holmes could do.
He had no chance of beating Tyson and he knew it.

1991 onwards he appeared to get his sharpness back against mediocre opposition, and had enough left to go the distance with Holyfield but there was no glimpse of him winning that fight either. He was crafty enough to last the distance and Holyfield was smart enough to settle down and box and outwork him too.

All credit to him for beating Mercer but that says more about what Ray Mercer lacked rather than a 'rejuvenation' of Larry Holmes.
Jesse Ferguson turned the trick against Mercer about a year later too. Ferguson also did better against Holmes in a 1994 when they were both old and fat.