Holmes vs Liston

[juggernaut666]

Please re-read the dialogue between ourselves.

My initial response was to your comment that the Holmes that beat Esch would defeat Liston, so it was that version of Holmes that I was focusing on, not a career Holmes.

Your initial response was persued by you...this is what you posted after I clearly gave my reason...


'Holmes balance was close to non-existent which forced him to rely almost exclusively on the use of the remnants of a once fine jab."

the above quote you stated reflected not on Bean but Holmes in general...unless I misunderstood?

But You then escalated the discussion to a full blown who can do what...do you really want me to paste this discussion? you even asked how triangular theories prevail and brought up Machen to match Holmes? you are arguing with a student of HW boxing so please let it go. I get it you are an old/old school fan but you did nothing but try to insinuate I needed Bean to determine holmes ability to beat Liston with an computer image which only a fool would try and throw at me...again I didnt hit you with 30's Holmes yet ...shall we continue? or let it go?



you also quoted this....

'Yes I hold the opinion all fights have too many variables to give precision predictions of what would unfold, the example I always sight is Hearns-Duran.

'Unfortunately boxing is a sport where rarely are we surprised with the victor of a contest, so the standard has become "Boxer A will win" and then he does, no need for anything more."

This is jibberish.... any sport can have different outcomes as it is boxing is the simplest one because it has limited and set rule along with only TWO people competing so the odds are why the favorite almost always wins by who is favored to win...if you don't think you can determine a hypothetical assumption with intelligence of an educated guess...I don't know what else to say. wheather the outcome is right or wrong

'It takes a great deal more time and effort to try and accurately discuss any possible match-up.' ......

Which is what I did. what fight of listons do you contribute to being able to defeat Holmes ? I gave you even Bean? And at 52...so counter that one and we will go from there...its really that simple.though im not sure you want to do that considering their was no one like holmes in his time and certainly no 175 pounder that would give Holmes trouble ,unless you know a secret I don't know? please enlighten me and the rest here. im not trying to out do you but you haven't finished the discussion you started.

[Pugilist_Spec]

Holmes personally considers this a difficult match-up for himself.

[joeandthebums]

'Holmes balance was close to non-existent which forced him to rely almost exclusively on the use of the remnants of a once fine jab."

the above quote you stated reflected not on Bean but Holmes in general...unless I misunderstood?.

Yes I was only refering to specific fight.

But You then escalated the discussion to a full blown who can do what...do you really want me to paste this discussion? you even asked how triangular theories prevail and brought up Machen to match Holmes? you are arguing with a student of HW boxing so please let it go.

No I only questioned your opinion on Holmes at that stage stopping Liston.

My mentions of traingle theories and Eddie Machen were direct responses to comments you made, hence why I quoted you then made statement relevant.

I get it you are an old/old school fan but you did nothing but try to insinuate I needed Bean to determine holmes ability to beat Liston with an computer image which only a fool would try and throw at me...again I didnt hit you with 30's Holmes yet ...shall we continue? or let it go?

I appreciate thread subject, but not once have I took on that discussion despite this endless back and forth.

This is jibberish.... any sport can have different outcomes as it is boxing is the simplest one because it has limited and set rule along with only TWO people competing so the odds are why the favorite almost always wins by who is favored to win...

We differ with our logic then. The vast majority of the most popular sporting events have only two competitors - which you could equate to similar odds but do you not feel that is a view very simplistic in nature?

No the reason I hold a belief that the favourite always wins in boxing is more to do with the matchmaking and business structure of the sport.

if you don't think you can determine a hypothetical assumption with intelligence of an educated guess...I don't know what else to say. wheather the outcome is right or wrong

Yes I could make an educated guess, but I would rather steer clear of guess work, which is what all fantasy match-ups are.

im not trying to out do you but you haven't finished the discussion you started.

And I you. I have no interest in getting into endless back-and-forths, which it seems we often do when attempting even the most basic discussion because we communicate in different ways.

All the best.