Originally posted by poet682006
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Larry Holmes was he really over the hill vs Tyson
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Cardinal Buck View PostYou walked into my trap, actually. I agree that 88 Holmes would beat Sam Peter. You were trying to make some sort of lame excuse about inactivity and conditioning limiting Holmes' performance against Tyson. No, actually Mike Tyson is the one who limited Holmes' performance. 38>42.
38>42 indicates that you let statistics dictate your views rather than observation.
Last edited by Scott9945; 08-21-2012, 07:35 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Scott9945 View PostOf course. Inactivity and conditioning have nothing to do with performance.
38>42 indicates that you let statistics dictate your views rather than observation.
1. Holmes wasn't really that inactive
2. He wasn't really out of shape. (His weight was less than in his comeback and he was completely fit for a four round fight, which is what he got)
3. We do know he was 4 years younger than he was when he fought Mercer
A lot of it comes down taking Holmes' words at face value. He didn't like Tyson to begin with and he just got humiliated in the ring. He had a lot of explaining to do after the fight. He also said Tyson didn't hit hard, but I'm skeptical about that one too.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cardinal Buck View PostHe also said Tyson didn't hit hard, but I'm skeptical about that one too.
PoetLast edited by JAB5239; 08-21-2012, 10:00 PM.
Comment
-
nah, he definitely has downplayed Tyson's power probably out of personal dislike for him and what happened in their fight. He claimed Norton hit harder too.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cardinal Buck View Postnah, he definitely has downplayed Tyson's power probably out of personal dislike for him and what happened in their fight. He claimed Norton hit harder too.
Called Ali overrated, said Marciano couldn't hold his jockstrap, talked crap about Foreman, hated on Tyson
A genuinely bitter person
Comment
-
Some say Holmes' bitter attitude is what lost him the title in the first place, or at least, the rematch with Spinks. Anyone here agree with that? Probably due to his criticism of the judges.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Cardinal Buck View PostThese are my points:
1. Holmes wasn't really that inactive
2. He wasn't really out of shape. (His weight was less than in his comeback and he was completely fit for a four round fight, which is what he got)
3. We do know he was 4 years younger than he was when he fought Mercer
A lot of it comes down taking Holmes' words at face value. He didn't like Tyson to begin with and he just got humiliated in the ring. He had a lot of explaining to do after the fight. He also said Tyson didn't hit hard, but I'm skeptical about that one too.
Comment
Comment