How do you rate tysons ko victory over larry holmes ?

Tyson didn't rate it high...in the post fight talk he said he wouldn't have stood a chance against Holmes in his prime.....dudes forget how classy Mike was!! i dont think it was to do with tyson not rating it highly but more to do with being humble in victory.he had respect for holmes, but also didnt like the beating he gave his idol ali

Tyson didn't rate it high...in the post fight talk he said he wouldn't have stood a chance against Holmes in his prime.....dudes forget how classy Mike was!!

Holmes was no doubt past his very peak but he would beat anyone today barring the klis and i think hed have a far better chance against the klits than he did against tyson

It's sad the midget's best win was over a 39 year old washed up inactive for 2 years ali wannabe Tyson has fought better opposition than Wlad and Vitali combined, so you're really not making a case for their greatness with these ridiculous comments.

Homles wasnt peak, still world class victory. man, that ****star in your avi, who is she?? is she have nice rear??? she so cute.

This subject has already been addressed in the following thread: Almost every subject has been discussed before. Anyway, i think it was one of tysons best wins. Holmes was well past it, and rusty, but still showed ring smarts, still had a great chin, and was able to frustrate Tyson for a while. Tyson never really had a truly great win. But he showed in this fight all it takes from him is the right punch at the right time. He also showed he wasnt just a KO boxer, but he would out work his opponents. Tysons career is full of 'what if's' and excuses, but they are valid imo.

Lets not forget that Holmes took the fight at short notice, even given that Tyson would have won if they were both at their peak age or condition. Tyson at his peak would have beaten any heavyweight in history other than Ali who would have danced around him and jabbed him to death for 15 rounds. And please don't mention those big russians, Tyson would have got under their long range jabs and knocked them out with upper cuts, easy, no problem, too quick, too fast, too strong, too skillful, too much class and no steroids either, Mike was all natural power. How do you know this for certain?

For me, prime Holmes was 1978-1983. He just happeened to meet a prime Tyson in 1988. So for me the win is ok not earth shattering or great. I feel like you have to look at when they fought, rather than what box rec says. For me, his Cooney fight was Holmes masterpiece. I'd go with this. Holmes wasn't at his best, conditioning wise, and ring rusty, when he fought Tyson, but as later fights showed his age shouldn't be held up as a factor in the loss.

For sure, Iron Mike was helluva puncher. Though, Tyson opponents who've also met Shavers and Foreman say that their punches hurt a lot more. The devastating effects Tyson's punches had, they refer to his speed. They never saw them coming. A punch which hurts more doesn't necessarily mean it's doing more damage.

People dont give tyson the credit he deserves for this fight imo.people say holmes was shot yet 4 years later he beat an undefeated ray mercer handily then 6 months later gave a prime holyfield hell for 12 rounds,plus the fact he is the only man to ko holmes. Holmes's jaw was granite,he took the best shavers had and got back to his feet. If only tyson didnt lose his head,and the people around him who kept him in check.the man was a perfect fighting machine in his rooney days Given what Holmes would do later, and that it's his only stop loss, it merits high. However, the layoff of Holmes coming in and the relatively short camp he had to work the rust off take away from the win a bit. It was a solid crossroads win no matter how sliced, but open to wild under and over rating both ways.

I saw an interview with Holmes about the Tyson fight on ESPN some time ago. He had been retired 2 years and at the time had no interest at all in ever fighting again. He was enjoying his retirement and was sedentary and had gotten fat. He was offered a Tyson fight twice and turned it down because he just didn't need or want it. Then when they offered it to him the 3rd time it was for 5 million dollars and he thought WTF that's a lot of money. He said OK and trained 5 or 6 weeks (I can't remember) for the fight...which tells you didn't care and how serious he was. He said that had he really trained with the intention of winning he would have taken Tyson into deep water and beat him...and he knew how to fight fighters like Tyson and exploit there weakness...and I think he may have done it. There is no way anyone should look at that fight and think they saw Tyson beat the real Larry Holmes. He just traded off his name and legacy for a very rich payday and couldn't care less about it.

Tyson may never have beaten a great fighter but he KO'd a fighter in Holmes who was next to impossible to KO.

Of course, those losses dont count and cant be used to downgrade Tyson, let alone Tysons losses to Lennox and Evander. They dont count as well. Those guys wouldnt have beat Tyson in his prime, and Buster is the only one who fought a prime Tyson even though Tyson wasnt at his best on the night. Lennox and Evander might have beat Tyson in Tysons prime, but unfortunately they didnt beat a prime Tyson as well. Those guys didnt beat THE TYSON, just like Norris never beat THE SRL and Holmes and spinks never beat a prime Ali. If ALi and SRL reputations for being great isnt tarnished, then Tysons cant be either. Although a way to downgrade Tyson is that he never beat any truly great fighters. But how he dealt with what he had to play with is how Tyson will be judged. And he dealt with people as good as a man can do. Exactly, Tyson was already on a downward spiral before he lost to Douglas (who don't forget was down for longer than ten in the fight). Given the right people around him Mike would have retired unbeaten and would be now regarded as the greatest Heavyweight of all time. Of this I have no doubt.

What, Danny Williams and Kevin McBride don't count? Of course, those losses dont count and cant be used to downgrade Tyson, let alone Tysons losses to Lennox and Evander. They dont count as well. Those guys wouldnt have beat Tyson in his prime, and Buster is the only one who fought a prime Tyson even though Tyson wasnt at his best on the night. Lennox and Evander might have beat Tyson in Tysons prime, but unfortunately they didnt beat a prime Tyson as well. Those guys didnt beat THE TYSON, just like Norris never beat THE SRL and Holmes and spinks never beat a prime Ali. If ALi and SRL reputations for being great isnt tarnished, then Tysons cant be either. Although a way to downgrade Tyson is that he never beat any truly great fighters. But how he dealt with what he had to play with is how Tyson will be judged. And he dealt with people as good as a man can do.

Holmes being over the hill and retired a couple years and not taking even one tune up takes alot away from the importance of the win. But it is still a good name to have on your record.

tyson has only lost once and that was against Buster Douglas. Tyson IMO is a top 15 ATG heavyweight. Physically he was one of the greatest heavyweights of all time, just look at him on the heavy bag. Tyrell biggs fought Tyson, Lennox, Bowe, and gives Tyson the edge. In his prime his record speaks for itself. Although, i can see the tail end of his career can effect how people judge him at his peak. Unfortunately I don't think we ever even saw how good Mike Tyson could have been given the way his life went off the rails at such a young age. If Cus hadn't passed away and had been able to keep Mike in check and not let all the negative influences (Don King, and all those hangers on) into his life then I believe that a focused Mike Tyson would have dominated the division for as long as he chose to remain in the game. As they say, the star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.

If Mercer's a bum, what does that make Vitali? Mercer did a better job than Vitali on a better version of Lewis, and did it without menstruating all over the place. Let's see mercer got completely owned, and vitali retired lewis who cheated. I'd say that makes vitali better. Also, in lewis' own words " I'm like fine wine, I get better with age "

tyson has only lost once and that was against Buster Douglas. Tyson IMO is a top 15 ATG heavyweight. Physically he was one of the greatest heavyweights of all time, just look at him on the heavy bag. Tyrell biggs fought Tyson, Lennox, Bowe, and gives Tyson the edge. In his prime his record speaks for itself. Although, i can see the tail end of his career can effect how people judge him at his peak.

Tyson vs. Holmes Lets not forget that Holmes took the fight at short notice, even given that Tyson would have won if they were both at their peak age or condition. Tyson at his peak would have beaten any heavyweight in history other than Ali who would have danced around him and jabbed him to death for 15 rounds. And please don't mention those big russians, Tyson would have got under their long range jabs and knocked them out with upper cuts, easy, no problem, too quick, too fast, too strong, too skillful, too much class and no steroids either, Mike was all natural power.

Legendary nights: Holmes vs Cooney, part 1 of 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azx70t_Ztlo&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL6FC6A33B397F1FAB