prime tyson vs the rivals of prime holmes

This.

And Shavers gets stopped early doors.

 

Oh, seems you agree

As for Larry-Mike, I actually think Tyson sparks him at any stage if Larry's career. Holmes traded on his excellent powers of recovery but could be hit and could be hurt.

Tyson, at his best, would always finish Larry off I imagine.

 

Tyson has almost all of them out fast, in his prime. Ken Norton wouldn't last a round. Cooney wouldn't last a round. Shavers wouldn't last a round. Leon Spinks wouldn't last past the first combination in the opening seconds. H2H Tyson takes a big steaming dookie on Holmes and if he had Holmes' opposition, it would be very clear who the better heavyweight was. Tyson is more skilled with greater physical attributes. A level above. Longevity is about as meaningful in assessing them here as Vitali Klitschko having more longevity than Joe Frazier. It means nothing. Witherspoon would take some serious punishment in the best fight of the lot.

 

Shavers would be gone in 1-2 rounds.

 

I've always believed peak Holmes would beat Tyson in a great fight. Larry would keep Tyson off himself far better in his prime and would get hit far less at that distance. I think he'd tie up Tyson quite well in close, jab from the outside and test Tyson with his excellent uppercut. Holmes stamina, heart, determination and skill would hold him in good stead.

You could rest assured Eddie Futch would have the best game plan imaginable on the go.

I wouldn't get in a lengthy debate on the topic, i appreciate Tyson has a decent chance and can see why he has his supporters in this one.

 

********

 

I just think Larry was buzzable at his best. Agreed that he'd know what to do, I just think Tyson was a far better finisher than say, Shavers or Weaver.

All fair though and yes, no need for this again :good

 

For sure Tyson was a far better finisher and in fact fighter. This would also factor into Holmes preparation and tactical mindset. Have a look at the first Shavers fight, Earnie barely touched him. Of course Tyson is a much different animal. I'd pay the bucks to see it.

 

Shavers has a big shot. Tyson was fast and evasive but he never fought a puncher like Ernie. Ernie don't have to catch him flush to finish it. Explosive while it lasts- 2 rds either way.

 

in Holmes' favour against a prime Tyson is that Tyson becomes less dangerous and more predictable after the first 5 or 6 rounds. still very dangerous but not quite the same he is early on. he tended to ebb and flow in intensity after the initial onslaught
Holmes tended to get better as fights went on
the longer it goes the better holmes' chances.

the same thing applied to their 1988 fight too. But Holmes seemed to have nothing much in his toolbox to get him past the most critical stages

 

good point. shavers wouldnt have to go looking for Tyson

 

Prime Tyson would n't have much problem with any of them. I can imagine Shavers shaking him up,briefly,but the 'Acorn' would n't be fast enough to follow up quick enough.

 

I forgot about Witherspoon. He'd give Tyson a pretty decent fight,and may last the distance.

 

Tyson took bombs off some massive hitters and was never one to be put away easy. Past prime Lewis and Steward could not believe how much he took off Lewis. Earnie wasn't the most pinpoint of punchers and i don't think he'd penetrate Tyson's awesome defense at his peak. Shavers wilder slower blows would be countered with scorching accurate bombs. I highly doubt Earnie has the class here vs Tyson's defense and countering. People forget Tyson barely got caught by a solid punch at his peak.

 

Very similar to Louis - Marciano except Holmes was in even worse form. Passing of the torch fights.