If Holmes was in his prime, would he have still lost to Tyson?

[Chew BackAtacha]

Prime Tyson is over-rated. Prime Holmes is under-rated. Holmes by decision, when the going got tough, Holmes found a way to win. when the going got tough for tyson, he found a way to lose

[nillamilkshake]

Prime Tyson is over-rated. Prime Holmes is under-rated. Holmes by decision, when the going got tough, Holmes found a way to win. when the going got tough for tyson, he found a way to lose

Interesting post. I'm not a fan of Tyson, really. He's an animal, not a boxer, IMHO. Nonetheless, I'm going to have to disagree with you.

[CarlosG815]

He's an animal, not a boxer, IMHO.

You've just lost any credibility you may have had.

Tyson is one of the greatest, most skilled boxers in the history of boxing.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

[TBear]

You've just lost any credibility you may have had.

Tyson is one of the greatest, most skilled boxers in the history of boxing.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

You are basing this on the competition he faced over a relitively short period of time. Fighters like Tucker, Biggs, Smith and Thomas. Really it is hard to messure skill by this level of competiton.

[CarlosG815]

You are basing this on the competition he faced over a relitively short period of time. Fighters like Tucker, Biggs, Smith and Thomas. Really it is hard to messure skill by this level of competiton.

No, it's really not. You can measure certain skills by film.

You could say the same thing about anybody.

[geribeetus]

You are basing this on the competition he faced over a relitively short period of time. Fighters like Tucker, Biggs, Smith and Thomas. Really it is hard to messure skill by this level of competiton.

disagree completely. maybe they weren't top 10 prime heavyweights, but he fought plenty of damn capable fighters in the 80s. you could say the same about a lot of ali's 60s comp.

[Jim Jeffries]

Who did prime Holmes ever fight that was anything like a prime Tyson?

Jabs don't win fights against prime Tyson. He's too hard to hit. I wouldn't expect a guy who only watches Klitschko and David Haye video's to contribute anything to a thread discussing two American Greats.

And I wouldn't expect a blinded Tyson fanboy to give a unbiased opinion of how Mike would fare against a top 5 ATG HW like Larry Holmes.

Great, neither have faced an opponent like the other, so it's impossible to determine a winner, right? Wrong, that's where impartiality allows an intelligent prediction (tough stretch for you, I know.)

Here is a little test that I'm sure you'll fail. How do you see Tyson doing against Liston and Foreman?

BTW there are certain things you can't determine from a fighter facing inferior competition just trying to survive till the final bell. The first three people that Tyson faced who weren't afraid of him, beat him. That should tell you something right there.

What was it you said about Ricky Hatton being a bum because he didn't fight DLH, Trinidad and Mosley in 2003, while he was still working his way up the ranks at 140 and those three just happened to be fighting at 154? Because that was priceless.

[CarlosG815]

And I wouldn't expect a blinded Tyson fanboy to give a unbiased opinion of how Mike would fare against a top 5 ATG HW like Larry Holmes.

Great, neither have faced an opponent like the other, so it's impossible to determine a winner, right? Wrong, that's where impartiality allows an intelligent prediction (tough stretch for you, I know.)

Here is a little test that I'm sure you'll fail. How do you see Tyson doing against Liston and Foreman?

BTW there are certain things you can't determine from a fighter facing inferior competition just trying to survive till the final bell. The first three people that Tyson faced who weren't afraid of him, beat him. That should tell you something right there.

What was it you said about Ricky Hatton being a bum because he didn't fight DLH, Trinidad and Mosley in 2003, while he was still working his way up the ranks at 140 and those three just happened to be fighting at 154? Because that was priceless.

You have to try diverting the topic to scrubbish Ricky Hatton because you have nothing worth reading to say.

Nobody needs 40 fights to "Move up the ranks." He had 30 fights under his belt to move up to WW. DLH has said many times that he feels most comfortable at ww, and his record at that weight will back that up.

You just don't know **** about what you're talking about. Funny how when the older reputable guys stepped in to discredit Ricky Hatton, you and your fellow huggers disappeared and the thread died.

[Jim Jeffries]

You have to try diverting the topic to scrubbish Ricky Hatton because you have nothing worth reading to say.

Nobody needs 40 fights to "Move up the ranks." He had 30 fights under his belt to move up to WW. DLH has said many times that he feels most comfortable at ww, and his record at that weight will back that up.

You just don't know **** about what you're talking about. Funny how when the older reputable guys stepped in to discredit Ricky Hatton, you and your fellow huggers disappeared and the thread died.

I already said Hatton wasn't an ATG and it's doubtful he'll make the HOF, except maybe out of popularity as might Gatti. I just enjoyed proving that you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. Why on earth would he move up to WW when he hadn't even won a title at 140 yet? His people had moved him along slow, is that necessarily Hatton's fault? No. Was he ready to jump up in weight when he hadn't yet established himself at his natural weight? Of course not. And we're talking about a guy 5'6" with a 20 inch arm length.

Way to duck the rest of my post. I expected as much.

[CarlosG815]

Great, neither have faced an opponent like the other, so it's impossible to determine a winner, right? Wrong, that's where impartiality allows an intelligent prediction (tough stretch for you, I know.)

Here is a little test that I'm sure you'll fail. How do you see Tyson doing against Liston and Foreman?

BTW there are certain things you can't determine from a fighter facing inferior competition just trying to survive till the final bell. The first three people that Tyson faced who weren't afraid of him, beat him. That should tell you something right there.

I analyze fantasy fights all the time. You're trying to say that Holme's jab would be effective against Tyson, when Tyson fought other fighters who had great jabs (including Holmes, even if he was a little past prime), and it wasn't effective. What I'm saying is, Holmes never fought a guy like Tyson so for you to assume that because his jab was effective against slower less skilled opposition, it would have the same effect against a guy like Tyson, and that isn't the case.

The first three people that faced Tyson that weren't afraid beat him? You are such an idiot, man, I really don't know that it's worth debating with you. Many people feared him, but I'd say most of his competition was not afraid of him.

Berbick wasn't afraid, he was ready to go. Ruddock was not afraid, and after what he felt was a premature stoppage, he was ready to go again and went 12 rounds - he was not afraid of Mike.

The fact is, once his "aura" wore off and he was going longer in fights, guys started to get more confident - not at all scared.

You sound like one of those idiots that heard somebody say "Tyson beat everybody before he even fought them, they were so scared!!" once before and now you recite it like it's gospel when any real fan will tell you that isn't the case, and he beat his opponents with his skill.

But I can understand a guy who's on the other side of the reservation, who worships Lennox Lewis and the Klitschko's, would not be able to understand this, as they don't like exciting fighters and will try to claim that he was all hype and bull**** because he isn't anything like the Klits.

Quit reciting what you heard somebody else say - that last comment made you look like a bigger idiot than you already are.