Why did Holmes and Foreman never fight ?

They were signed to fight in '99 or '00 I believe, but the promoter couldn't come up with the cash and it fell through. Foreman's power was finally going by the time he fought Briggs, and this would have been after that. Without Foreman having that big power, my money is on Holmes by decision. Holmes was far quicker than him (always) and especially toward the end of their careers, and Holmes's style and skills aged fairly well.

Now, had they fought in their primes? I mean, Foreman was a hell of a lot better than Shavers. If Holmes would have been able to pull it off, he'd probably have had to get off the canvas a time or two to do it.

 

To answer OP’s question, I’ll relate an anecdote (I think it comes from the book, The Right Stuff, and it may have a few details wrong by my memory but the point is the same):

During the race to the moon in the 1960s, the director of NASA told one of the prime astronauts (I think it was Alan Shepard) that he needed to go to Washington to glad-hand and wine dine some senators.

The astronaut refused. He said his job was flying rockets and he had plenty of training to do to be ready for his mission. He’d let the administrators do the politicking.

The NASA head explained to him that getting to meet a real astronaut and hang out with him is a big deal to these important people and he needed to do it for the program. Again, he passed.

The director asked him, ‘Do you know what makes that rocket go to the moon?’

The astronaut started into an explanation about propulsion and thrust and physics and the NASA guy interrupted him.

“FUNDING. That’s what makes that rocket go to the moon.” The senators, he said, controlled NASA’s funding.

Then the famous line, “No bucks, no Buck Rogers.”

The astronaut went to Washington.

So what happened to Holmes-Foreman? No funding. The promoter couldn’t come up with the money. No bucks, no fight.

 

1. Foreman didn't want it.
2. It didn't particularly favor either fighter.

If they had fought, then one of the old guys woudl have eliminated the other.

Far better for them to both try to make advantageous matches.

 

I read George didn't want the fight.

 

I think schedules stopped the fight happening if it was good money his management would’ve figured it out no matter how much “The Easton Assassin” insists he was ducked but that’s only what I believe. Larry Holmes has always been my pick for this fight he was cagey with lots of pop.

 

Although they are roughly the same age Foreman was a top contender by the time Larry turned pro. By the time Larry was fighting contenders George had already retired following the Jimmy Young fight.

In this second career George fought stiffs for the most part the first two years of his comeback and Larry had retired after Tyson blew him out

They could have fought from 1992-1995 but George didn't need Larry as George was a marketing machine and could pick and choose his fights.

I think after both had lost to Holyfield in title shots Larry wanted to fight George but Foreman didn't need to fight him.

That George was able to get a shot at Moorer after being schooled by Morrison showed the power of his popularity.

 

Holmes prime ... in the second career who knows ... it never happened because George never felt he needed it, period. Larry would take it if George offered it today and there was any money in it.

 

They are the same age but took wildly different paths. Foreman was the early bloomer whose first career was already done by the time Holmes become a contender. Because of this Foreman is lumped in with 70s fighters who were older than him and Holmes with 80s fighters who were younger than him despite Foreman and Holmes being the top 2 HWs of their actual biological generation.

In the 90s there was nothing either stood to gain from fighting each other. A 40+ year old trying to prove they are still relevant isn't going to fight someone the same age. Even if they were both ranked that would be viewed as a senior event.

 

Prime for prime Holmes would have been WAY up for Foreman. He'd have to scrape himself off the canvas, but would as usual roar back. Foreman is stumbling, legs hardly under him when the ref stops it in the 10th.

 

Would have been a magnificent fight in their respective primes.

I lean just to Foreman. But with no conviction whatsoever.

 

The fight Evander Holyfield should have prevented...

 

It didn't benefit either guy.

I have read somewhere that Holmes didn't want to fight Foreman in 1976 but am not certain if its true.

 

I fancy Holmes for the same reason that I fancy Wlad over Foreman. Holmes was a better boxer, with a much better jab and Foreman struggled a bit against the boxer types. The fact that Holmes had a lightning jab and Foreman always was kind of ponderous makes it firmer for me. I'd give Foreman a better chance primes for prime because he could pressure well and if he dragged Holmes into a firefight he could win that. But old vs old give me Holmes.