BoxRec

All these statements have been made twenty years later when both have mellowed and are good friends now.

In my opinion tyson would have still knocked out the prime holmes only it would have taken 9 or ten

Holmes was my hero and favorite boxer growing up, but prime Tyson is all wrong for him. No matter how many tune ups he had, Tyson knocks him out. Prime for prime, I don't think Holmes has enough foot movement to win and his powers of recuperation would not be enough once Tyson had him hurt. It pains me to say it, but Tyson would beat Holmes.

I do think Tyson is very underrated on these boards. People tend to gloss over the Spinks win as if it was nothing. Holmes wasn't ready. Tucker hurt him. He couldn't stop Smith.

Prime Tyson was a destroyer like Dempsey. Leaving Rooney was a stupid mistake and by the time he stepped in the ring with Bruno, he was no longer the monster he once was.

I think because of what actually happened it's hard to "un imagine" it.

But prime for prime Holmes would be able to out think and out class Mike.

This goes for George Foreman as well. And it has little to do with style, but George might be more vulnerable to the "fluke" Tyson win.

Mike feasted very dramatically on some basic fighters and it looked good on video and built quite an impression with many.

AND.....He never got up ONCE off the canvas to win a fight. Nor did he EVER come back to win a fight that he was losing.

Pretty big chink in the resume when you claim he could beat one of the true top five champions of all time.

I think he gets his proper respect....and it's appropriately limited. He entertained us greatly. But he fought his way through a hole in the division.

And when he faced some genuinely formidable competition, he struggled, and often came up short.

Spinks is his best win, and it was convincing. But I believe Spinks honestly lost his confidence, and was overwhelmed by the hype.

Holmes, Foreman, Frazier, Ali, would never be sucked into that. In fact, it could have easily worked itself in reverse.......I feel that's the reason we never saw Foreman Vs Tyson.

Some people have this mythical view of Mike Tyson, this belief that with Cus he would've been unstoppable.

Against Tyson you would need to be able to turn the BOXING match into a FIGHT. OF course it requires the ability to take a few punches in order to defuse the raging time bomb Tyson is in the first few rounds. You have to tie him up and tame him because he doesn't set a pace.

Tyson just comes out swinging. It's up to the opponent to set a pace. Not many can do this. By the time you've tried you're usually looking at the ceiling lights, if your eyes are even open. Larry is one of the few who CAN tame Mike in the early going.

Larry would have to be in the shape he was in against Ali. He brought his A-game because he didn't know what to expect with Ali.

Larry was strong enough to turn a boxing match into a FIGHT. He could do it all. He is the one heavyweight who had an answer for nearly every style. Though Ali would win a decisive one against Larry.

Larry pops the jab hard and fast in the early going. As Mike rushes in Larry might take a few but not enough to KO him. He ties Mike up, frustrates him and bullies him like Mike has done to so many others. If we are taking both in their prime the edge would certainly go to Holmes because his prime was at 30 and Mike's was at 22-23. Larry is the more mature and seasoned veteran.

I can't count the number of times I've seen Tyson fight and wonder why his opponent doesn't see obvious leaks in his defense or capitalize on the huge mistakes Mike often made in the ring. People are so busy watching Tyson that they can't focus on what the opponent is doing. Usually they're terrified.

Larry would fight King Kong. You have to understand what a man has inside. Larry is the oldest of a large family........WITH NO FATHER. He was Big Brother, provider, protector. There will be no fear factor here. Mike often cried before fights. Larry would get under his skin. Go ahead and say he did that already and paid when he actually fought Mike. I was there. I have seen Mike fight live 6 times. I KNOW Larry wasn't ready. He either took the fight on short notice or not at all. Jim Jacobs was a very smart man. HE did most of Mike's work for him, not Cus.

Mike would certainly be a hand full in the early going. However, Holmes is one of the FEW who would defuse Mike early and get past the raging bomb Mike is in the early rounds. You have to FIGHT him, PUSH him, FOUL him when he fouls YOU and even more so. Larry was generally a clean fighter and decent person. However, he can fight Clean, Dirty or anyway you wanna go with it.

Larry would do everything that needs to be done to take Mike out of his game early. Everyone had a game plan. Most would work provided you can stop Mike from doing what he does best and, above all, Don't Be Afraid. Evander and Buster KNEW this. Hell, Evander should be locked up for the things he did to Mike in the ring. After 6 it was like Man vs Boy. Holyfield looked Ten Feet Tall. Mike was mesmerized.

Larry would do the same. It would take him a few rounds to let Mike KNOW "This is how we will do it". Once you take charge you can control the situation. Larry would take charge, tame Mike early then beat him up in the middle rounds and stop him in 11 when Mike, still on his feet, doesn't want to fight anymore.

Holmes by TKO in 11

keithmoonhangover wrote:Holmes was my hero and favorite boxer growing up, but prime Tyson is all wrong for him. No matter how many tune ups he had, Tyson knocks him out. Prime for prime, I don't think Holmes has enough foot movement to win and his powers of recuperation would not be enough once Tyson had him hurt. It pains me to say it, but Tyson would beat Holmes.

I do think Tyson is very underrated on these boards. People tend to gloss over the Spinks win as if it was nothing. Holmes wasn't ready. Tucker hurt him. He couldn't stop Smith.

Prime Tyson was a destroyer like Dempsey. Leaving Rooney was a stupid mistake and by the time he stepped in the ring with Bruno, he was no longer the monster he once was.

I think it's THE FIRST TIME that I have ever agreed with you in a boxing topic!

I don't see many guys beating the Iron Mike of 1985-88 era

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Holmes was my hero and favorite boxer growing up, but prime Tyson is all wrong for him. No matter how many tune ups he had, Tyson knocks him out. Prime for prime, I don't think Holmes has enough foot movement to win and his powers of recuperation would not be enough once Tyson had him hurt. It pains me to say it, but Tyson would beat Holmes.

I do think Tyson is very underrated on these boards. People tend to gloss over the Spinks win as if it was nothing. Holmes wasn't ready. Tucker hurt him. He couldn't stop Smith.

Prime Tyson was a destroyer like Dempsey. Leaving Rooney was a stupid mistake and by the time he stepped in the ring with Bruno, he was no longer the monster he once was.

I think it's THE FIRST TIME that I have ever agreed with you in a boxing topic!

Prime for prime, I would go for Tyson too.

DrunkenBoxer wrote:Holmes would have beat tyson if he had 2 tune up fights before hand.

That is all ...

... unfortunately very unlikely.

Syntax Error wrote:I don't believe there is anyway a 39 year old Larry Holmes would beat prime Mike Tyson, even with a couple of tuneups.

Holmes would have to be about 30 years old & in his absolute pomp to stand any chance against peak Tyson.

i disagree. a prime larry has all it takes
to weather the storm of the bully, who
gets frustrated quickly if things do not
go his way.

keithmoonhangover wrote:Holmes was my hero and favorite boxer growing up, but prime Tyson is all wrong for him. No matter how many tune ups he had, Tyson knocks him out. Prime for prime, I don't think Holmes has enough foot movement to win and his powers of recuperation would not be enough once Tyson had him hurt. It pains me to say it, but Tyson would beat Holmes.

I do think Tyson is very underrated on these boards. People tend to gloss over the Spinks win as if it was nothing. Holmes wasn't ready. Tucker hurt him. He couldn't stop Smith.

Prime Tyson was a destroyer like Dempsey. Leaving Rooney was a stupid mistake and by the time he stepped in the ring with Bruno, he was no longer the monster he once was.

i think prime tyson has still one flaw:
no second idea. throughout history
every fighter had his kryptonite out
there, the man who would not react
in the same way as all the others. and
the ATGs had to find a way. i do not
think mike had that. if the guy didn't
fall, he was clueless.

mike's every single punch was meant
to take the other guy out. which costs
a lot of power and yet some opponents
you have to walk down or you can only
defeat on points.

i cannot recall if mike tyson was ever
fighting on his toes.

Spinks is his best win, and it was convincing. But I believe Spinks honestly lost his confidence, and was overwhelmed by the hype.

I'm a Spinks fan and it pains me to say it, but he didn't turn up believing he could win that night. He went in the ring totally dry, was nodding to the crowd before the introductions and didn't look focused at all.

man wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:I don't believe there is anyway a 39 year old Larry Holmes would beat prime Mike Tyson, even with a couple of tuneups.

Holmes would have to be about 30 years old & in his absolute pomp to stand any chance against peak Tyson.

i disagree. a prime larry has all it takes
to weather the storm of the bully, who
gets frustrated quickly if things do not
go his way.

That was after trainer Kevin Rooney, right?

Truthseeker wrote:

Spinks is his best win, and it was convincing. But I believe Spinks honestly lost his confidence, and was overwhelmed by the hype.

I'm a Spinks fan and it pains me to say it, but he didn't turn up believing he could win that night. He went in the ring totally dry, was nodding to the crowd before the introductions and didn't look focused at all.

He didn't believe for one second that he could win.

I think he knew he was out of his depth long before fight night, but went through with it because it was the right thing to do.

elmersalsa wrote:

man wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:I don't believe there is anyway a 39 year old Larry Holmes would beat prime Mike Tyson, even with a couple of tuneups.

Holmes would have to be about 30 years old & in his absolute pomp to stand any chance against peak Tyson.

i disagree. a prime larry has all it takes
to weather the storm of the bully, who
gets frustrated quickly if things do not
go his way.

That was after trainer Kevin Rooney, right?

you might have a point here.

elmersalsa wrote:I don't see many guys beating the Iron Mike of 1985-88 era

There are some fighters that you are "all heart" about. Mike is one of them. A heart is not what one should bet with.


Once again.....

Tyson NEVER came from behind to win
Tyson NEVER got up off the canvas to win
Tyson OFTEN has his opponent psyched before the fight.
He was not a ring general, and did not plan on "what to do if things start to go south".

A great HW simply waits out the storm. And creates a winning strategy in mid flight. It's not about Holme's style as much as it is Holme's ring generalship, his endurance, and his chin. The latter possibly could let him down I suppose, but prime mike was the only one to KO an old Larry. And Larry showed some signs of life even from his wheelchair in that fight. At his prime his vital signs would likely remain stable. I don't think Larry would get as careless as he did with Snipes or Ernie, but if he did, he would likely have a bad night. But my money is on Larry.

BoxBuzz wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:I don't see many guys beating the Iron Mike of 1985-88 era

There are some fighters that you are "all heart" about. Mike is one of them. A heart is not what one should bet with.


Once again.....

Tyson NEVER came from behind to win
Tyson NEVER got up off the canvas to win
Tyson OFTEN has his opponent psyched before the fight.
He was not a ring general, and did not plan on "what to do if things start to go south".

A great HW simply waits out the storm. And creates a winning strategy in mid flight. It's not about Holme's style as much as it is Holme's ring generalship, his endurance, and his chin. The latter possibly could let him down I suppose, but prime mike was the only one to KO an old Larry. And Larry showed some signs of life even from his wheelchair in that fight. At his prime his vital signs would likely remain stable. I don't think Larry would get as careless as he did with Snipes or Ernie, but if he did, he would likely have a bad night. But my money is on Larry.

Iron Mike with trainer Kevin Rooney was a different story. I thought the same thing about him back in the day, but, when I started watching his fights from the beginning, I realized that this guy was a phenomenal fighter at only 18 to 20 years old. His focus was fighting and his managers did the rest. I haven't seen a 20 year old heavyweight champion being that good.

Once he fired Rooney, he went downhill. He struggled with a bum named Frank Bruno for 4 rounds, in which I believe with Rooney in there the fight would've ended much quicker.

He had heart and won. An example is James "Quick" Tillis gave him hell, but, he arose to the occasion and won the decision. And he was only 19 or 20.

Pinklon Thomas was outboxing him. He found out a way to win. The same with Tony Tucker...He found out a way to win. Why? Because of Rooney.

BoxBuzz wrote:I think because of what actually happened it's hard to "un imagine" it.

But prime for prime Holmes would be able to out think and out class Mike.

This goes for George Foreman as well. And it has little to do with style, but George might be more vulnerable to the "fluke" Tyson win.

Mike feasted very dramatically on some basic fighters and it looked good on video and built quite an impression with many.

AND.....He never got up ONCE off the canvas to win a fight. Nor did he EVER come back to win a fight that he was losing.

Pretty big chink in the resume when you claim he could beat one of the true top five champions of all time.

I think he gets his proper respect....and it's appropriately limited. He entertained us greatly. But he fought his way through a hole in the division.

And when he faced some genuinely formidable competition, he struggled, and often came up short.

Spinks is his best win, and it was convincing. But I believe Spinks honestly lost his confidence, and was overwhelmed by the hype.

Holmes, Foreman, Frazier, Ali, would never be sucked into that. In fact, it could have easily worked itself in reverse.......I feel that's the reason we never saw Foreman Vs Tyson.

I cant agree.
Tyson did not have to come off the floor to win but he overcame huge punches from bruno,and ruddock in particular to win.he took a terrible beating from douglas and but for a incompetent referee may have got the stoppage.he walked through smiths hardest right and fired back with fury.

Holmes is an inferior boxer to ali and didnt have the same toughness or chin or power.

I think Ali,Foreman and Frazier have the tools to dominate Tyson.

Frazier though for all his toughness would be engulfed by tysons speed and superior skills

Tyson wasn't remotely more skilled than Frazier.

BoxBuzz wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:I don't see many guys beating the Iron Mike of 1985-88 era

There are some fighters that you are "all heart" about. Mike is one of them. A heart is not what one should bet with.


Once again.....

Tyson NEVER came from behind to win
Tyson NEVER got up off the canvas to win
Tyson OFTEN has his opponent psyched before the fight.
He was not a ring general, and did not plan on "what to do if things start to go south".

A great HW simply waits out the storm.

Did Holmes in his prime ever face anyone close to tyson in a terms of a boxer with that speed,power,intensity and defence?
How about I say Tyson was that dominant he didnt need to come from behind.in his prime he was only ever behind once ....and nearly came back and won.
You seem willing to disregard holmes post 86 so why not disregard tyson mk 2 ? For cravities sake the man had been out of a boxing ring for four years.Holmes was unable to see of another fast and unorthodox fighter in spinks.

Holmes was hardly shot 83-86 but when u compare common opponents there is no comparison .....berbick,williams, spinks, smith,frazier ....tyson looked better against all of them.

Hell if an aged shavers and a snipes had Holmes down, he definetly gets hurt in a tyson fight.

Your first two big questions....can simply be answered by Tyson was that good that in his prime he didnt need to come back off the canvas or adversity to win.....the one time he needed to ( having handicapped himself by not training,incompetent corner,Japanese whores) he still would have pulled it out.

Equally u seem to imply the fact he psyched out opponents was an unfair advantage and tyson should be discredited for it,rather than the reality ....he was that good....he could do it....

How in the world can you say Tyson looked better against marvis? Lol, that's gotta be a draw.

For all his foibles I wasn't aware mugabi was a Tyson Ranter before now

I see your point saad i did ponder momentarily whether to include frazier. In hindsight holmes"s knockout may be the more brutal.Equally they just cant be compared as both are one round beatings.

Counterpuncher , u may have a,point. Youtube is full of fools proclaiming tyson as the best fighter of all time.but i stand by my beleif in tyson beating holmes every time,unless i can be convinced otherwise

In my view, I don't think that the masses saw a peak prime Mike Tyson. Like the greats Muhammad Ali or Larry Holmes, or Roberto Duran or Sugar Ray Leonard, we saw their total primes. I think Tyson was getting there. He would've gotten there if trainer Kevin Rooney would've not gotten fired.

At 20, I don't see no heavyweight in history that was advanced as a fighter like Iron Mike. He was too devastating and phenomenal.

Holmes was more competitive with holyfield. The best fighter that both of them fought. Not that I subscribe to that kind of methodology.

elmersalsa wrote:In my view, I don't think that the masses saw a peak prime Mike Tyson. Like the greats Muhammad Ali or Larry Holmes, or Roberto Duran or Sugar Ray Leonard, we saw their total primes. I think Tyson was getting there. He would've gotten there if trainer Kevin Rooney would've not gotten fired.

At 20, I don't see no heavyweight in history that was advanced as a fighter like Iron Mike. He was too devastating and phenomenal.

I don't think we ever saw prime Ali. Tyson was always the same.