1978-1980 Larry Holmes vs 1986-1988 Mike Tyson

[Enlightened-One]

Tyson never overcame adversity inside the ring.

When Holyfield was a massive underdog against Tyson, he bullied the overwhelming favourite, because he’d sparred with him years earlier and already knew he had his number.

Tyson was mentally weak.

If you listen to Tyson’s tearful comments about Muhammad Ali, he might have been a “bad mutherf*cker”, but he wasn’t “willing die to for this sh*t” (his actual words), because he felt Ali was the greatest.

If people seriously doubt my claims, then challenge me. Bring it on and you’ll be surprised about the sheer volume of evidence I’ll be able to supply.

You're not only on the wrong track, you're on the wrong train going the wrong way with your headphones on listening to Teddy.

Seriously, what exactly do you know about adversity?

Making broad-brush sweeping criticisms without directly challenging any of my assertions?

Is that because it’s easier to insult someone personally than refute the real-world truth they’ve conveyed?

Which part of my post do you disagree with?

Is it the “never overcoming adversity inside the ring” part or are you more offended about what I said about Holyfield and Ali?

[Loki]

Either Tyson knocks him out or Holmes wins a decision.

It’s pretty pointless discussing prime for prime as nobody really knows what would happen.

[The Gratest]

Tyson TKO 10th.

A still disciplined, training hard and hungry Tyson is unlike anything Holmes has faced. If a limited but power punching Shavers can connect and put Holmes down then a vicious combo punching Tyson can put him down, then do enough to get a TKO.

[apollo creed]

Tyson is a mistery. At 21-22 y/o , he wasn't even in his prime years as a boxer. That's why it's sooo f-cking interesting and curious to see what type of a fighter Mike would've been at 27-28 y/o with Cus/Rooney on his corner and with no bad distractions outside the ring?!

I think the Tony Tucker fight could give us a clue. Tucker also fought six years later (after the fight with Tyson) against Lennox where L.L won by UD.

Maybe Tyson was pretty good for a short-stocky HW.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Tyson is a mistery. At 21-22 y/o , he wasn't even in his prime years as a boxer. That's why it's sooo f-cking interesting and curious to see what type of a fighter Mike would've been at 27-28 y/o with Cus/Rooney on his corner and with no bad distractions outside the ring?!

I think the Tony Tucker fight could give us a clue. Tucker also fought six years later (after the fight with Tyson) against Lennox where L.L won by UD.

Maybe Tyson was pretty good for a short-stocky HW.

Mike would always have had distractions provided by the millions he was earning.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Tyson is a mistery. At 21-22 y/o , he wasn't even in his prime years as a boxer. That's why it's sooo f-cking interesting and curious to see what type of a fighter Mike would've been at 27-28 y/o with Cus/Rooney on his corner and with no bad distractions outside the ring?!

I think the Tony Tucker fight could give us a clue. Tucker also fought six years later (after the fight with Tyson) against Lennox where L.L won by UD.

Maybe Tyson was pretty good for a short-stocky HW.

Mike would always have had distractions provided by the millions he was earning.

Prime can come and go at different stages of you career. But yeh, even with Tyson, who knows of at 20 years old, he was still getting to his peak. Shame we didn’t find out.

[Onetimeonly]

Mike had the same appetites and issues. Cus enabled him by covering everything up.

[snake33]

If we're talking the Kevin Rooney Tyson, he would have beat Holmes.
After that he would not beat a prime Holmes.

[Enlightened-One]

The heavyweight scene improved drastically from 1990 onwards.

It’s sad to say this, but Mike Tyson’s best wins during the 1990s were against Donovan Ruddock (1991); Bruce Seldon (1996); and Frank Bruno (1996).

And when Tyson eventually fought the best fighters of the 1990s, Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis, he lost rather badly.

In terms of The RING annual ratings, who else did Tyson fight during the 1990s that were top-ten world-rated heavyweights during that decade that I haven't already mentioned? The answer is simple - none one.

He didn’t face Michael Moorer, Riddick Bowe, Ray Mercer, George Foreman, Tim Witherspoon, David Tua and Ike Ibeabuchi.

I’m not saying he would have tasted defeat to all these fighters, but a few of them were capable of beating him during the 1990s.

And before anyone claims that Tyson was past his physical prime during the 1990s, they need to remember he was only 23½ years of age on the 1st January 1990.

During the 2000s, before the Lewis defeat, Tyson was rated above the Klitschko brothers and Chris Byrd. That iteration of ‘Iron’ Mike would have almost certainly been dominated by those three guys.

In 2003, when people still thought Tyson had something left after scoring a first round KO over Clifford Etienne, I feel he would have lost to blown-up middleweights like James Toney and Roy Jones Jr.

To be honest, I’m not sure if Tyson suddenly became a shot (or at least a much worse) fighter shortly after his 23rd birthday or whether his impressive performances between 1986 and 1989 were due to him enjoying a title reign during a weak heavyweight era.

Whilst I’m sure this post is going to ruffle the feathers of many BoxRec forum members, they really need to review Mike Tyson’s resume from 1990 onwards before criticising the factual accuracy of this post.

[DrDuke]

Tyson was past prime after the split with Rooney. That doesn't mean, that he was shot, but he was already declined to some extent. Anyway, his prime is overrated, even in it he wouldn't win neither prime Holmes nor prime Holyfield with Lewis.

[Onetimeonly]

If we're talking the Kevin Rooney Tyson, he would have beat Holmes.
After that he would not beat a prime Holmes.

Did you see Tillis? Rooney was there.

[The Gratest]

In terms of The RING annual ratings, who else did Tyson fight during the 1990s that were top-ten world-rated heavyweights during that decade that I haven't already mentioned? The answer is simple - none one

The answer doesn't appear to be that simple.

[apollo creed]

Tyson is a mistery. At 21-22 y/o , he wasn't even in his prime years as a boxer. That's why it's sooo f-cking interesting and curious to see what type of a fighter Mike would've been at 27-28 y/o with Cus/Rooney on his corner and with no bad distractions outside the ring?!

I think the Tony Tucker fight could give us a clue. Tucker also fought six years later (after the fight with Tyson) against Lennox where L.L won by UD.

Maybe Tyson was pretty good for a short-stocky HW.

Mike would always have had distractions provided by the millions he was earning.

Yup. He was craving to have some extra fun.

[apollo creed]

Tyson is a mistery. At 21-22 y/o , he wasn't even in his prime years as a boxer. That's why it's sooo f-cking interesting and curious to see what type of a fighter Mike would've been at 27-28 y/o with Cus/Rooney on his corner and with no bad distractions outside the ring?!

I think the Tony Tucker fight could give us a clue. Tucker also fought six years later (after the fight with Tyson) against Lennox where L.L won by UD.

Maybe Tyson was pretty good for a short-stocky HW.

Mike would always have had distractions provided by the millions he was earning.

Prime can come and go at different stages of you career. But yeh, even with Tyson, who knows of at 20 years old, he was still getting to his peak. Shame we didn’t find out.

Yup.

[jamesmcdonnell]

The heavyweight scene improved drastically from 1990 onwards.

It’s sad to say this, but Mike Tyson’s best wins during the 1990s were against Donovan Ruddock (1991); Bruce Seldon (1996); and Frank Bruno (1996).

And when Tyson eventually fought the best fighters of the 1990s, Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis, he lost rather badly.

In terms of The RING annual ratings, who else did Tyson fight during the 1990s that were top-ten world-rated heavyweights during that decade that I haven't already mentioned? The answer is simple - none one.

He didn’t face Michael Moorer, Riddick Bowe, Ray Mercer, George Foreman, Tim Witherspoon, David Tua and Ike Ibeabuchi.

I’m not saying he would have tasted defeat to all these fighters, but a few of them were capable of beating him during the 1990s.

And before anyone claims that Tyson was past his physical prime during the 1990s, they need to remember he was only 23½ years of age on the 1st January 1990.

During the 2000s, before the Lewis defeat, Tyson was rated above the Klitschko brothers and Chris Byrd. That iteration of ‘Iron’ Mike would have almost certainly been dominated by those three guys.

In 2003, when people still thought Tyson had something left after scoring a first round KO over Clifford Etienne, I feel he would have lost to blown-up middleweights like James Toney and Roy Jones Jr.

To be honest, I’m not sure if Tyson suddenly became a shot (or at least a much worse) fighter shortly after his 23rd birthday or whether his impressive performances between 1986 and 1989 were due to him enjoying a title reign during a weak heavyweight era.

Whilst I’m sure this post is going to ruffle the feathers of many BoxRec forum members, they really need to review Mike Tyson’s resume from 1990 onwards before criticising the factual accuracy of this post.

For once I agree with EO.

[apollo creed]

The heavyweight scene improved drastically from 1990 onwards.

It’s sad to say this, but Mike Tyson’s best wins during the 1990s were against Donovan Ruddock (1991); Bruce Seldon (1996); and Frank Bruno (1996).

And when Tyson eventually fought the best fighters of the 1990s, Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis, he lost rather badly.

In terms of The RING annual ratings, who else did Tyson fight during the 1990s that were top-ten world-rated heavyweights during that decade that I haven't already mentioned? The answer is simple - none one.

He didn’t face Michael Moorer, Riddick Bowe, Ray Mercer, George Foreman, Tim Witherspoon, David Tua and Ike Ibeabuchi.

I’m not saying he would have tasted defeat to all these fighters, but a few of them were capable of beating him during the 1990s.

And before anyone claims that Tyson was past his physical prime during the 1990s, they need to remember he was only 23½ years of age on the 1st January 1990.

During the 2000s, before the Lewis defeat, Tyson was rated above the Klitschko brothers and Chris Byrd. That iteration of ‘Iron’ Mike would have almost certainly been dominated by those three guys.

In 2003, when people still thought Tyson had something left after scoring a first round KO over Clifford Etienne, I feel he would have lost to blown-up middleweights like James Toney and Roy Jones Jr.

To be honest, I’m not sure if Tyson suddenly became a shot (or at least a much worse) fighter shortly after his 23rd birthday or whether his impressive performances between 1986 and 1989 were due to him enjoying a title reign during a weak heavyweight era.

Whilst I’m sure this post is going to ruffle the feathers of many BoxRec forum members, they really need to review Mike Tyson’s resume from 1990 onwards before criticising the factual accuracy of this post.

The story is that Mike's focus wasn't 100% to boxing after he made lots of money and he didn't have his former old trainers to train and motivate him, even if Mike was 23 y/o which was pretty young and very 'vulnerable'.

But yeah, beside the Holyfield fights, Mike didn't fight no other notable HW in the 90s like Bowe, Foreman, David Tua or Ike Ibeabuchi.

[Nile4000]

Larry Holmes would win a UD 15 over Mike Tyson. I could possibly see Mike flooring Larry early, but not keeping him there, and after round 6, the problems start for Mike. Larry by 11-4 in rounds.

[Klee Gluckman]

IM going to commit a sin here and back Tyson. Tyson under Rooney has every chance here. Tyson would be faster than anyone Larry has fought. Under Rooney Tyson has the defensive skills as well. However Only in a small window. Larry destroys Tyson without Rooney,

[amwsnw]

Holmes could possibly stop Tyson. Either way, Larry for me.

[gilgamesh]

It definitely favors Larry if it's a 15 rounder here. Over 12 he may lose a decision to Mike actually if he wasn't KO'd. Larry would benefit greatly from the 15 round distance, but the early going in this fight would always be extremely dangerous for him.

He was able to have some slight success against Mike even in their 1988 bout so he'd surely have done a good bit better in his younger form, with better legs, and quicker movement. Mike would still be lightning fast, and a hellacious puncher though so it's still an extremely dangerous fight.

[goose 5]

Jimmy Jacobs turned down a Tyson-Holmes fight that was proposed by HBO for September 1986 saying that Tyson wouldn't be ready for Holmes for another 6 months.

[Les Norton]

This is all CRAP TALK. so many old farts in this group who think their youngster days heros still matter.

Out these old farts who call themself hardcore boxing fan, NOBODY KNOWS mr. Larry Holmes.

If you ask any UFC or other combat sport fan, they know mike tyson. But non give a Fart about Larry WHO !

Given that people here are primarily fans of boxing, they’re not likely to seek out UFC or other combats sports fans about their opinions on boxing or boxing history.
They are less likely to give a shit about their opinions because they don’t like, know or really follow boxing.
Just because you and those people you refer don’t know Larry Holmes doesn’t mean he wasn’t a great fighter that would’ve totally schooled a fella that you have heard of.
There was a fighter before Larry called Ali, you should ask some of the old farts here about him.
He went okay too

[RScarf1]

Carl Williams lost a controversial decision to Larry Holmes in 1985, but that was when Holmes was past his prime. Tyson won by knockout in the first round against Williams, but that was in 1989 and the fight may have been stopped prematurely.

Rather than compare how they did against common opponents, I think it is better to look at who they beat when they were at their best. Holmes won a title eliminator by a wide unanimous decision against Earnie Shavers who was a very hard puncher. Then Holmes won the title against Ken Norton who was near the end of his prime, but still in his prime and Holmes won a very close 15-round split decision. Holmes won a rematch against Shavers by TKO in the eleventh, but Holmes was knocked down in the seventh.

Tyson in his prime was knocking out most of his opponents, but he did go the distance against James "Bonecrusher" Smith and Tony Tucker in 1987. Tyson won by unanimous decision in both. Based on that, I think that if Holmes in his prime was the opponent instead of Smith or Tucker, then I think it would go the distance with Holmes winning by decision against Tyson. Also, Holmes has two wins by TKO over Smith in 1984 and 1999.

[robbydecker]

This one's a real pick em. Pretty much a classic 50-50 boxing affair I'd conclude.

In a first of three trilogy I could see Holmes winning a close decision. 7-6-2 in a 15 rounder.

The second bout I could see Tyson finding the spots and catching Holmes, ala-Ernie Shavers style, but being able to then finish Holmes. Something between the 9th and 12th round.

Then I see Holmes making the adjustments in a third finale bout and once again winning a decision, and this time a much more clear cut decision. 8-4-3 in a 15 rounder.

[Contendeh]

Holmes lands the jab from the outside, Tyson counters this by using his fast movement to get on the inside and attacks to the head and body of Larry.
Larry holds and they both fight on the inside, break.
This happens a lot.

The repetition of this begins to bore Tyson in the middle rounds which lets Larry become more effective.

Tyson has some great, exciting, moments where it looks like he might get the knockout bringing the crowd to its feet but Holmes puts more rounds into the bank than Iron Mike. A prime Holmes chin and legs don’t let him down.

UD Larry Holmes.