Tweet
What are your thoughts on Holmes vs Tyson, Larry had been out of the ring for 18 months, came back and got KOd by then champion Mike Tyson, Larry then took 3yrs out of the ring before coming back and going 21-3 with 2 world title fights, IMO Holmes put up exceptional performances against Holyfield, Mercer & McCall yet those fights came more than 4yrs & 7yrs after his loss to Tyson.
-
-
he clearly wasnt washed up or finished when he fought tyson, but he clearly wasnt in his prime and at his best either. too many ppl overlook that fight on tysons resume, it was a good win. -
IMO he was over the hill. Look at his fights with Spinks. It's my opinion that a prime Holmes would have won those fights decisively. On top of that add 18 months of inactivity and a short camp and you have a recipe for a defeat against a prime Tyson.Comment
-
Most certainly past his best.
The fact he performed with respect after the loss with some respect adds more gravitas to the Tyson win than was maybe accorded at the time.
I struggle to see how anyone could argue he was prime or even particularly close to it.Comment
-
i am not arguing anything, it is clear that Holmes was well past his prime when he lost to Spinks, what i am asking is what are your thoughts on Holmes vs Tyson?... as i feel it was a very impressive victory for Tyson due to Larry's resume after his loss to Tyson.Originally posted by VibesMan View PostComment
-
His jab was the reason for those exceptional performances, and for the first couple of rounds it kept Tyson at bay. I think the 1978-1982 Holmes would've been hell for Tyson. The 1988 and beyond simply wasn't quick enough, despite the greatness of his left jab. I still believe he was robbed in his second fight with Spinks.Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View PostComment
-
Excellent question, Sonny. A person can look at it as Tyson's most impressive win on his resume. Especially when you saw what Holmes did in the 90's way past his prime. Holmes and Foreman were remarkable in their past 40 achievements.Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View PostComment
-
I'm not suggesting that YOU were arguing it. I'm simply stating I would find it hard to believe anyone else could make a case for it being prime Larry.Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View Post
My memories (and I've not watched it for a while) is that Larry was far from outclassed in the opening rounds. I seem to recall him up on his toes shooting out the jab in a fairly good impersonation of his old self at one stage.
I'm a big Mike fan so I try to be objective about it. To knock out any version of Holmes is a result to be treated with respect.Comment
-
The main problem I had with it was, that Holmes didnt have enough time to prepare. The fact that he was able to compete with top fighters after that shows that he still had a lot left in the tank.
I would class it as a B+ win for TysonComment
-
quite true.. Holmes himself said he would need 9 months to prepare for Mike Tyson not the 2 months he had in 88Originally posted by -LightsOut- View PostComment
Comment