I think Holmes once he became active again was a better fighter post the Tyson defeat. Tyson wasn't the same in the 1990's. Suppose the Holmes who beat Mercer fought Tyson. Any chance Larry takes it? Maybe not, but I think he makes a much better showing.
I'd say if they fought at both aged 30-40 Holmes would take it, he'd even have a decent chance of winning after Tyson got out of prison.
No chance. First off, Larry was not putting himself in the ring with any hitters. And if he really wanted and campaigned for it, he likely could have gotten a rematch with the guy. He'd get steamrolled again because he did not have the legs to keep his distance. And Mike was still quick enough to still come over that Holmes jab with his right hand.
agreed.. Being that much older would have had just as much bearing on Holmes as being inactive did in their initial meeting. I think Larry might have lasted a few more rounds due to Tyson's decline in ability during that time frame as well as Holmes having shaken off a little rust, but at the end of the day he still gets stopped.
I think Tyson even during the 90's would be too much for Holmes at that stage of his career. Maybe if you put Tyson from 2002 against Holmes from the early 90's you could give Holmes a good chance.
Tyson was the wrong style for Holmes, too good of a right hand and various off rhythm angles. I think any version of Tyson( except the Danny Williams, McBride version) would beat any version of Holmes
Prime for prime on the best nights of their careers its not unreasonable to pick Tyson. But if you're choosing "any" version of Holmes, including the very best version, then I don't think it would take the Danny Williams rendition of Tyson to lose. Hell the Holmes who beat Ken Norton might have beaten the Tyson who lost to Douglas or even the one of the Ruddock fights.
Or maybe even the version of Tyson who beat Michael Spinks, Holmes who beat Norton was a completely different story then the version of Holmes who Tyson beat....
I'm not sold on who would win at their best either way. But I don't at all judge their actual 1988 meeting as indication of anything either. That Holmes was beyond shot, and beating guys like Tim Doc Anderson or even a lazy Ray Mercer years later, didn't do anything to change my perception of that.
Could be the best Holmes could beat him at a lower state but I still think Mike had a huge advantage with his right hand power and angles. Mike is still more of a complete combination puncher than Weaver,Shavers,Snipes and they all had Holmes is serious trouble, difference is Mike was a good finisher
