Prime: Muhammad Ali .Vs. Larry Holmes

I will never be convinced that Larry would be some easy win for Ali. I think the prime Larry would always have a shot at beating Ali. He was better technically than Foreman and Frazier and Norton, and had a better jab. He had a decent right hand . I would pick Ali but barely.

 

Larry would have his moments but I still would pick Ali in a really good fight. Oddly enough I think Ali would find a home for his right lead and give Larry fits with it. No knockout either way but Ali would take it on points.

 

Ali close.

I feel he was a bit to crafty, and has a "find a way to win" streak that is one of the strongest in boxing history, regardless of weight class.

In a fight that comes up almost even, which this does, I give the edge to the stronger heart, and I believe Ali has the edge there, even though Holmes was a tough, big hearted SOB too.

 

I see Muhammed winning due to the fact that Larry wasn't as good going forward,something he would have to do against Ali.

 

Both of these fighters were best when their opponents came at them. Holmes had a much better, accurate and more consistent jab than Ali. This is the major factor in the fight. It would be a boring jab fest. Of course, Ali is the faster, more athletic fighter, but this fight would be about movement. It would be about smarts and accuracy. Holmes was the smarter fighter, and I think he would have eaked out a tough decision.

 

Ali and Holmes are even many categories, but a prime ALI had a tremendous advantage with movement and foot speed. I believe ALI would have had a one-sided Unanimous Decision win over Holmes.

 

Ali pre 67 wins i close but clear dec. Ali 71-75 thats a toss up imo

 

With the seventies Ali,I would pick the 1972-74 version over Holmes. Narrowly. 1967 - A competitive,but clear decision to Ali.

 

I'm going with the 'Easton Assassin',,,

During Muhammad Ali's '1964 thru 1967' reign,,,,,,,,,

Larry would have been the better man, by a close but solid decision on 'neutral ground'.

It would have been a replay of the 'First Round' between Muhammad Ali vs Zora Folley
for all '15' rounds, with Larry Holmes (as Zora Folley).

Straight hard left jabs, and quick straight right hands on the 'button'.

 

ali 67 woulda used more circular movement v holmes. folley was a good workout for that right hand over the left.

 

Zora 'Bell' Folley - owned Muhammad Ali for 2 1/2 Rounds.

That's 7 minutes and 30 seconds.....

 

My very brief $0.02.
I've always said that Ali was the greatest HW champ, my big reason being we never saw what would have been his prime years (summer of 67 - summer of 70)
I've always hated comparing fighters from different eras because the landscape was different in every era.
Two examples that cross my mind:
Floyd Patterson would have been a chiseled 205 in 2000.
The Klitsko (sp.) boys wouldn't have been 240+ pound beefcakes in the 30's-40's.
That being said the two HW champs I've always said could possibly give Ali fits were Larry and...Jack Dempsey.
Dempsey? I never saw him cut and his whiskers were solid enough that Ali wouldn't stop him IMO.
At approx. 200 lbs. he would have been a move forward dynamo with a two-fisted attack that even Smokin' Joe lacked.
I wouldn't bet against Ali but something tells me this may well be a tough, hard fought UD for Muhammad.
Larry? Always saw him as a slightly less active, less moving, robotic version of Ali. But add in a great chin, and a jab that was equal (or greater) and you've got a stylistic enigma. No way IMO this fight ends in stoppage. Interesting that both of them basically had no left hook to speak of, both relying on smarts and the ol' ''one-two'' attack.
Another poster mentioned that both fighters excelled when their opponent(s) took the fight to them. I agree.
Which leads me to believe that (unfortunately) this scrap might not be
the HOF pvp matchup that many envision and, instead, might become a boring chess-match affair. I'd have to go with Ali on a decision but I'm at a loss as to how he would do it based on their styles.
I guess my $0.02 wasn't that brief. :yep

 

I think a lot of it would depend on how Ali handled Holmes psychologically and vice versa. I don't know whether Holmes would simply ignore the inevitable taunting and just grind out a decision or if Ali would get under his skin and kid his way to a victory. If we are talking politics rather than pure technical ability then Ali would surely get the decision, he was just much more popular. Look at how he kidded his way to otherwise close points decisions over Ken Norton.

I don't think the real Ali fight means that much, Holmes was beating up his idol, he wasn't going to show too much of his real skill and may have been a bit sloppy just to make Ali look better than he was.

If it's pure skill then Holmes but if Ali gets into his head then Ali.

 

Absulte physical prime Ali before his layoff beats Holmes to a UD but I think Holmes beats any version of the post layoff Ali.

 

I'm totally amazed that anyone thinks a prime Ali would have an easy time with Holmes. I think that Holmes has the perfect style to give Ali serious problems. Many fighters couldn't match Ali because he was so good on the outside with his movement, speed and jab. Those were his three main tools. Yes, he had a right hand and combinations but for the vast majority of his time during his prime it was movement and boxing ability with the jab. Holmes has more than enough speed behind his own jab, while coming forward, to catch Ali regularly. And he's got the ability to bang Ali to the body when he closed the distance. No doubt, Ali would grab and wait for distance again to box behind the jab and throw right hands, etc. Ali would get the best of the outside work between them both, slightly. This is a hard nights work for Ali, to put it mildly.