He fought Tyson? I don't think he was shot at all. His cordination still looked good for the 4 rounds that it lasted, and he fought a good tactitical fight up until that point.
OK, I can go for that. He had the same amount of experience and tactitical skills hopkins had when he fought Tyson and had a big experience factor as well, just like Hopkins had over Pavlik.
I think your saying that cause Tyson knocked him out but he definetly didn't look that bad in the fight if you really watch it. Lets not forget Tyson is the only person to ever knock out holmes and even when holmes came back again in his 40's he did pretty well and managed to beat Ray Mercer at age 42, a guy who many people feel beat Lennox Lewis.
6.He was on the wane when barely edging Carl Williams and losing two razor thin dececsions to Spinks.However he schooled Ray Mercer several years after he was butchered by Tyson.He also gave Holyfield a fair fight.
That's the samething I said. He still looked much better against Tyson, than he did against Mercer and Holyfield. Which I think people should give Tyson some credit for beating holmes and it's fair to say if he was at his best it would be more competitive but Tyson's chances would still be good.
Larry Holmes was just rusty and still soft from his 20 month layoff. Larry Holmes in 1988 at age 38, was not in peak form at 227 pounds... Holmes needed 1988 and a couple of "Tune-Ups" in order to get ready for Tyson... Holmes would've been better off had he fought a few times leading up to Tyson..... :bbb MR.BILL
I think rather than making a more lengthy seriously thought out comeback, he took an emotionally charged stance and wanted to prove things in a very hands on macho way.. Look at the way years later he made a proper comeback , lost a lot more bodyfat, boxed with class and balance and outhustled a deceint Ray Mercer.. and even later than that when he faced a good Evander Holyfield and handled a lively Oliver McCall , respectfully. Had he announced that he was willing to throw down against Tyson and taken 10 months with a Mackie Shilstone and a decent set of tactics.. he may have had enough flair to extend Tyson .. Larry wasn't in anywhere near his prime, but could have been in better frame of mind had he sat down and thought about the task a bit more..
That's why I said inbetween and he definetly looked better against Tyson than he did against Mercer, hell he was 4 yrs. younger and his legs were still pretty good when he fought Mike. I don't buy into Larrys excuses because he was just like(very arrogant) Roy Jones when it came to that and would never admit when a another man got the best of him. From what I seen in the fight, cause we all got 2 eyes, he didn't look all that bad against Tyson.
Many people feel Ray Mercer beat Lennox Lewis? Merver game him a tough fight, but i've never heard of 'many people' feeling that he beat Lewis.
Definitely past his prime, but not shot. 4 years later he beat Mercer and gave Holyfield a competitive fight. 3 years after that, he gave WBC champ McCall a pretty good fight. I voted 5.
No way he was as shot as some people say. He did not last long with Tyson but was never stopped again and thought bangers such as Tommy Morrison. Tyson was just a beast.