BoxRec

man wrote:
Foreman knockout 4-5.

i am not so sure. prime for prime
larry is one of the very few people
who give muhammad a difficult
night.[/quote]

I'm not talking h2h. I'm talking stylistic similarities.

I was a much bigger fan of Foreman than Holmes, even though I like and respect them both.

Thinking about GF vs Ali and Jimmy Young, I had to vote for The Eastin Assassin.

man wrote:

Mr.DW wrote:Holmes was NOT Ali. He didn't have the quickness, reflexes, footwork, flow, chin, or durability of Ali. They weren't even alike. They primarily boxed behind a jab (Ali more often than Holmes). That's about the only similarity.

Holmes would not fair well in Zaire like Ali did.

Foreman knockout 4-5.

i am not so sure. prime for prime
larry is one of the very few people
who give muhammad a difficult
night.

LOL.. Holmes didn't give Ali a difficult night.. He gave him an IMPOSSIBLE night.. It was not a "fight" but a reluctant and unenthusiastic beating.. Tim Witherspoon gave Holmes a difficult night. Larry had to fight his ass off. With Holmes-Ali neither combatant wanted to be there.. Ali was sacrificed for money.

Kalan wrote:

man wrote:

Mr.DW wrote:Holmes was NOT Ali. He didn't have the quickness, reflexes, footwork, flow, chin, or durability of Ali. They weren't even alike. They primarily boxed behind a jab (Ali more often than Holmes). That's about the only similarity.

Holmes would not fair well in Zaire like Ali did.

Foreman knockout 4-5.

i am not so sure. prime for prime
larry is one of the very few people
who give muhammad a difficult
night.

LOL.. Holmes didn't give Ali a difficult night.. He gave him an IMPOSSIBLE night.. It was not a "fight" but a reluctant and unenthusiastic beating.. Tim Witherspoon gave Holmes a difficult night. Larry had to fight his ass off. With Holmes-Ali neither combatant wanted to be there.. Ali was sacrificed for money.

ali-holmes was a clearly irrelevant
fight, so to me that never happened
in the sense that it provides zero
evidence for how a prime for prime
encounter would have played out ...

man wrote:ali-holmes was a clearly irrelevant
fight, so to me that never happened
in the sense that it provides zero
evidence for how a prime for prime
encounter would have played out ...

The Holmes-Ali match actually provides great insights into an Ali-Holmes fight in their primes... Just as the Joshua-Klitschko encounter points to Joshua winning if they met at age 32 – extrapolating on the refined skills Joshua will acquire over the next 5 years, based on where he already is now with 19 fights – and where Klitschko was at after 5 years with Emmanuel Steward.. Joshua ate a shot that wouldn’t get there if he had 100% finished skills.

Saying a fight never happened because it was a terrible loss is disingenuous.. Ali trained hard for the Holmes fight even though it was basically for the money – which was his biggest payday because it would have made him a 4-time Heavyweight Champion were he successful.. Ali fans were very hopeful I remember.

Holmes boxed great in his 40’s against Ray Mercer and others because he had elite master boxing skills that Ali lacked.. He could at least defend himself when his legs were shot, where Ali was more or less a sitting duck.

Kalan wrote:

man wrote:ali-holmes was a clearly irrelevant
fight, so to me that never happened
in the sense that it provides zero
evidence for how a prime for prime
encounter would have played out ...

The Holmes-Ali match actually provides great insights into an Ali-Holmes fight in their primes... Just as the Joshua-Klitschko encounter points to Joshua winning if they met at age 32 – extrapolating on the refined skills Joshua will acquire over the next 5 years, based on where he already is now with 19 fights – and where Klitschko was at after 5 years with Emmanuel Steward.. Joshua ate a shot that wouldn’t get there if he had 100% finished skills.

Saying a fight never happened because it was a terrible loss is disingenuous.. Ali trained hard for the Holmes fight even though it was basically for the money – which was his biggest payday because it would have made him a 4-time Heavyweight Champion were he successful.. Ali fans were very hopeful I remember.

Holmes boxed great in his 40’s against Ray Mercer and others because he had elite master boxing skills that Ali lacked.. He could at least defend himself when his legs were shot, where Ali was more or less a sitting duck.

man, you are quite something. i will
save both of us some finger tissue by
not engaging any further, since we are
way too far apart to have a meaningful
conversation.

just one note, the only other time i read
someone claiming ali had no "elite master
boxing skills" was by il douche ...

you can criticise muhammad for many
things; that ain't among those.

man wrote:

Kalan wrote:

man wrote:ali-holmes was a clearly irrelevant
fight, so to me that never happened
in the sense that it provides zero
evidence for how a prime for prime
encounter would have played out ...

The Holmes-Ali match actually provides great insights into an Ali-Holmes fight in their primes... Just as the Joshua-Klitschko encounter points to Joshua winning if they met at age 32 – extrapolating on the refined skills Joshua will acquire over the next 5 years, based on where he already is now with 19 fights – and where Klitschko was at after 5 years with Emmanuel Steward.. Joshua ate a shot that wouldn’t get there if he had 100% finished skills.

Saying a fight never happened because it was a terrible loss is disingenuous.. Ali trained hard for the Holmes fight even though it was basically for the money – which was his biggest payday because it would have made him a 4-time Heavyweight Champion were he successful.. Ali fans were very hopeful I remember.

Holmes boxed great in his 40’s against Ray Mercer and others because he had elite master boxing skills that Ali lacked.. He could at least defend himself when his legs were shot, where Ali was more or less a sitting duck.

man, you are quite something. i will
save both of us some finger tissue by
not engaging any further, since we are
way too far apart to have a meaningful
conversation.

just one note, the only other time i read
someone claiming ali had no "elite master
boxing skills" was by il douche ...

you can criticise muhammad for many
things; that ain't among those.

I can actually see both of your views.
I do not think Ali lacked skill in anyway shape or form.
But comparing Ali's late career to Holmes the difference in my opinion is that Ali relied on athleticism. Where as Holmes lacked Ali's natural athletic ability.
Holmes was able to adjust his style to compensate when his speed had gone. ALI could not make that adjustment.

tiny_acres wrote:I can actually see both of your views.
I do not think Ali lacked skill in anyway shape or form.
But comparing Ali's late career to Holmes the difference in my opinion is that Ali relied on athleticism. Where as Holmes lacked Ali's natural athletic ability.
Holmes was able to adjust his style to compensate when his speed had gone. ALI could not make that adjustment.

ali suffered from parkinson syndrome,
which had made his long term physician
leave the team.

anything a hurt ATG does within the ring
after being diagnosed like that, does not
count in my opinion.

this sub-debate here started within a thread
on both men in their primes. all else is pure
nonsense in my opinion. i do not think george
foreman is better than ali, because he had a
better late career. i think it is irrelevant and
the same is true for larry.

man wrote:

Kalan wrote:

man wrote:ali-holmes was a clearly irrelevant
fight, so to me that never happened
in the sense that it provides zero
evidence for how a prime for prime
encounter would have played out ...

The Holmes-Ali match actually provides great insights into an Ali-Holmes fight in their primes... Just as the Joshua-Klitschko encounter points to Joshua winning if they met at age 32 – extrapolating on the refined skills Joshua will acquire over the next 5 years, based on where he already is now with 19 fights – and where Klitschko was at after 5 years with Emmanuel Steward.. Joshua ate a shot that wouldn’t get there if he had 100% finished skills.

Saying a fight never happened because it was a terrible loss is disingenuous.. Ali trained hard for the Holmes fight even though it was basically for the money – which was his biggest payday because it would have made him a 4-time Heavyweight Champion were he successful.. Ali fans were very hopeful I remember.

Holmes boxed great in his 40’s against Ray Mercer and others because he had elite master boxing skills that Ali lacked.. He could at least defend himself when his legs were shot, where Ali was more or less a sitting duck.

man, you are quite something. i will
save both of us some finger tissue by
not engaging any further, since we are
way too far apart to have a meaningful
conversation.

just one note, the only other time i read
someone claiming ali had no "elite master
boxing skills" was by il douche ...

you can criticise muhammad for many
things; that ain't among those.

Ali was a good boxer... That allowed Ali to out-box fairly short guys such as: Patterson, Cooper, Liston, Folley, Mildenberger, Frazier, Chuvalo, Ellis, and uncoordinated, slow, and unskilled taller boxers like Terrell and Sabedong.. Ken Norton was a fair boxer with good height, size and strength.. He beat Ali and shattered his jaw.. But there's a million miles between fair boxers, good boxers, and that rare great boxer.. Ali was a great "fighter" considering his athleticism and chin, along with his skills.. Larry Holmes was a great "boxer" ... He was a master boxer with elite skills that only a few Heavyweights ever achieve.. If you get into your 40's and can still evade a highly ranked young Heavyweight's punches -- you had masterful boxing skills all along -- all day -- every day.

are you il duce?

I have no idea who duce was... I've only posted as Kalan... My posts are unique, expert, well thought out, and I support boxers of every race and nationality.

Kalan wrote:I have no idea who duce was... I've only posted as Kalan... My posts are unique, expert, well thought out, and I support boxers of every race and nationality.

Hmm, maybe we should just ban everyone else, and give you the forum.


For clarity sake. I mean there's so much viral/vile opinionated confusion out there. Perhaps a single well balanced voice is best.

That was Hitler's solution BuzzBox... He believed that a master mind would eliminate the riff raff and streamline decision making... That there was no reason to believe the collective intelligence of an assembly would come up with better solutions than a benign dictator... They just take forever and bog the whole system down to an "intolerable" degree with constant arguing, disputes, and debates that rarely take shape into finished legislation. A dictator doesn't need any agreement and just smooths things along... But who wants to be a dictator??? Generally a bully.

The problem with the master mind idea is most dictators are rank idiots -- and Hitler was certainly a mad man... Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore was a virtual dictator who enjoyed overwhelming Parliamentary support throughout his 30-year reign... He was one of the rare smart people who had that kind of power.

God implied that humans were actually meant to struggle like Hell in this world -- and see things through a cloudy veil that will be lifted in the next life... If man could figure everything out quickly and easily, with divine intelligence, we would see the consequence of all our actions ahead of time -- and would always choose the correct path out of self benefit... That wouldn't make life very interesting or add any drama to our existence ... how boring would that be?

There wouldn't be any wicked... no addicts or drunks... no poor... no distraught... no fat... no lost souls... no perverts... no sinners... only the truly wise and virtuous... That wouldn't make life very exciting or unpredictable... Nobody would have to worry about Climate Change because solar energy would already power the earth... Wars wouldn't happen because conflicts would be ironed out quickly and smoothly to both parties' satisfaction.

I guess that's why God did it his way... If you're going to have Heaven and Earth they have to have different setups.

I'll take Prime Foreman all day and twice on Tuesday.

Larry gets more revisionist love than Jerry Quarry on these forums. A supposed "Master Boxer" but got outjabbed by Lorenzo Zanon and couldn't keep distance from lead footed Mike Weaver and was on the edge of disaster is suddenly this unstoppable tornado of Willie Pep-like wizardry? Get serious. Foreman would close distance and lay the wood to Holmes. Holmes didn't have the firepower to keep him at bay and he'd get chopped down like a brittle, fragile tree.

Prime Foreman was a much better fighter than what he gets credit for, I think.

You're full of nonsense... Holmes won all those fights you mention -- and his performances were much better than your revisionism.

Let's talk about what's real and what happened... Not about your negative take on Holmes' ability... Jimmy Young had 20 wins when he out-boxed Foreman and floored him, cleverly wearing him out and beating him... Young lost 3 of his next 4 fights -- including 2 losses to undefeated Ossie Ocasio... Ocasio earned himself a World Title shot with Heavyweight Champion Larry Holmes with those 2 Young wins -- but Holmes made mincemeat out of Ocasio and dispatched the tyro in 7 rounds... Ocasio was a massive underdog even though he beat Jimmy Young twice and was undefeated.. Holmes was indeed an ATG master boxer.

Holmes did very well with boxers or punchers (going 48-0) ... Foreman did extremely well with punchers... But not that well with boxers (Ali and Young).

Holmes. He was a better boxer and could take a punch.