foreman vs. holmes. who wins?

[them_apples]

I think holmes is slightly overrated on forums. He came at a weaker era than the 70s and his best win was gerry cooney. He could be hit and dropped hard too. Foreman by stoppage.

yeah Larry is a bit overated in the serious boxing world, but underated by casuals.

Larry was simply a really good fighter that came along when the heavyweight division didn't have much comp. Like you said, Cooney was his best win and we don't know if Cooney was any good cause all he did was lose to Holmes. Over the hill Norton almost beat Holmes as well. Holmes would give anyone trouble but I'm not sure if he beats the divisions' greats.

[johnbook]

Similarly, prime Holmes vs Tyson?

Holmes has said in his prime or if he had more time to train, he'd have beat Tyson easy?

I'm not so sure, as Larry did not have the best whiskers which were needed vs George or Mike.

[QueensburyRules]

- -Yo, Booksie, fat Lar had his own home gym built on his property to train a year for Tyson.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

[john l]

Holmes. Style all wrong for Foreman. If not for Ali, Foreman could have very easily been champ until 78 or so when Holmes matured into a top heavy.

[QueensburyRules]

- -That giant sucking sound we heard was the Lar era.

[Rusty Tromboni]

yeah Larry is a bit overated in the serious boxing world, but underated by casuals.

Larry was simply a really good fighter that came along when the heavyweight division didn't have much comp. Like you said, Cooney was his best win and we don't know if Cooney was any good cause all he did was lose to Holmes. Over the hill Norton almost beat Holmes as well. Holmes would give anyone trouble but I'm not sure if he beats the divisions' greats.

Well said.


But I disagree with Norton being past it.

He really wasn't. He just didn't do well when things didn't go his way. Like a lesser version of Lennox Lewis.

I really think Cooney was a tremendous fighter offensively. He was brought along too fast, and didn't have the right guidance from the start. If he had always been a Gil Clancy product, he'd have been the guy to dethrone Holmes. (Something similar could be said of Foreman, while we're on the subject).

I don't want to exaggerate his ability. But he's kind of the opposite of Holmes. Like you said, Holmes is overrated by guys trying to prove they know something about Boxing, and wrongly dismissed by casuals who only remember him for the KO loss to Tyson.
Cooney was glorified by casuals, and it's become fashionable for Boxing "experts" to s h i t on his name. In reality, he falls somewhere in the middle.

but the point is, by the time Holmes met Cooney, he was at least good enough offenseively to show us the Holmes could handle Foreman.

Shavers and Cooney aren't on Foreman's level. I'd never suggest that, but they prove Holmes can turn it up against dangerous men. Pulling out the win even if just by attrition.

Foremen, lest we forget, lost handidly to Ali and Young. While they fought smarter, Holmes was cut from a similar cloth to the boys from Lu'ville.

Holmes will mix it up. There's no doubting that. It just cannot be ruled out. But assuming this really is the best Holmes, he waits until Foreman's blown his wad to engage.

Holmes overcomes some scares to rack up a surprisingly one-sided UD; laying it on heavy down the stretch against a faded Foreman.

[Rusty Tromboni]

- -That giant sucking sound we heard was the Lar era.

But he won. Didn't he?


He lost to Witherspoon and Williams (kinda). But the dude really put on some fine performances before his deformed body failed him. He lacked the ubiquitous talens that his predecessors had. He wasn't scary or awe-inspiring like Ali, Liston, Frazier and Foremen were. But he was consistent. He was durable. He was smart. And he was technically sound and complete as a boxer-puncher.

Like Apples said, he is a little too hyped by people who want you to know they know Boxing. And casuals have all but forgotten about him. But he was a great champ (even if he wasn't a great fighter). And that means a lot.

[QueensburyRules]

- -Had tubby Lar been a ranked fighter in George's eras, they would've fought.

He wasn't, and they didn't, hence that sucking sound that was Lars era.

[Rusty Tromboni]

- -Had tubby Lar been a ranked fighter in George's eras, they would've fought.

He wasn't, and they didn't, hence that sucking sound that was Lars era.

he cut his teeth the old fashioned way.


He's a lot like Hagler.

Hagler gets credit for it. Holmes doesn't.

Holmes never went mental like Foreman did.

[them_apples]

Well said.


But I disagree with Norton being past it.

He really wasn't. He just didn't do well when things didn't go his way. Like a lesser version of Lennox Lewis.

I really think Cooney was a tremendous fighter offensively. He was brought along too fast, and didn't have the right guidance from the start. If he had always been a Gil Clancy product, he'd have been the guy to dethrone Holmes. (Something similar could be said of Foreman, while we're on the subject).

I don't want to exaggerate his ability. But he's kind of the opposite of Holmes. Like you said, Holmes is overrated by guys trying to prove they know something about Boxing, and wrongly dismissed by casuals who only remember him for the KO loss to Tyson.
Cooney was glorified by casuals, and it's become fashionable for Boxing "experts" to s h i t on his name. In reality, he falls somewhere in the middle.

but the point is, by the time Holmes met Cooney, he was at least good enough offenseively to show us the Holmes could handle Foreman.

Shavers and Cooney aren't on Foreman's level. I'd never suggest that, but they prove Holmes can turn it up against dangerous men. Pulling out the win even if just by attrition.

Foremen, lest we forget, lost handidly to Ali and Young. While they fought smarter, Holmes was cut from a similar cloth to the boys from Lu'ville.

Holmes will mix it up. There's no doubting that. It just cannot be ruled out. But assuming this really is the best Holmes, he waits until Foreman's blown his wad to engage.

Holmes overcomes some scares to rack up a surprisingly one-sided UD; laying it on heavy down the stretch against a faded Foreman.

Yes.

But you have to take into context when certain fights are taking place. Like "losing to Ali and Young" are 2 completely different things.

When Foreman Fought Ali he's coming off 2 brutal stoppages over high ranked fighters that both beat Ali, Ali is "considered" to be leaving his prime and most think he's going to get killed.

When Foreman fights young everyone is saying his gas tank is low, he's slow, if you survive the first 5 he's easy picking. Post Ali George, Although physically prime - mentally was finished - which ultimately lead to him retiring. He came back with possibly the best mental game ever that he likely learned from Ali, but by this his physical had left him. You can literally see the change of styles that Foreman exhibited between the 2 fights, he fought like old george in a young mans body after Ali.


So that being said, What Ali did to break George down was way more than just quick hands, he had to endure a lot of pain to do it, and had to really get into Foremans head, talk **** while hitting him every time George hit him. Heart is a huge factor in boxing, and prime Larry vs 1974 George is not the same as 1976 Foreman vs Prime Holmes.

Holmes isn't gonna pull the rope a dope and **** talk while fighting back through a barrage of disrespecting bad intentions bombs, no - he's gonna box and move because he knows what happened to Frazier and Norton. Foremans gonna walk through Larry's punches like he walked through Ali's (that is until Ali mentally broke him) and then Larry is gonna wilt. he's gonna go in a 5 to 1 under dog and the press is gonna say he hasn't a chance, and Foreman is gonna make a beline for him like he's some journeyman scrub. Thats the difference between 2 years.

Had Ali not beat Liston years prior, I don't think he could have pulled off the Foreman win. This is what gave him the psychological edge.