Mike Tyson vs Larry Holmes debate

S

spacetime

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
11,863
Reaction score
320
People always claim that Tyson never beat any all-time great and that the one he did beat was over the hill. Joe Rogan and his crew but also boxing folks....

Do these people forget that an even older Holmes went on to beat a peak Ray Mercer? Does this not validate Tysons win over Holmes?

To me it does... It proves that Holmes was not washed up. So what are these people on? They don't think beating a Young Ray Mercer is a scalp?
 
Holmes was definitely as good as most of the guys Tyson beat even in his post-prime. He landed some nice jabs before Tyson killed him. Tyson haters will do anything to take away from his greatness. The same racists and bigots who love Fury.
 
spacetime said:
People always claim that Tyson never beat any all-time great and that the one he did beat was over the hill. Joe Rogan and his crew but also boxing folks....

Do these people forget that an even older Holmes went on to beat a peak Ray Mercer? Does this not validate Tysons win over Holmes?

To me it does... It proves that Holmes was not washed up. So what are these people on? They don't think beating a Young Ray Mercer is a scalp?
Click to expand...
Holmes was a factor in the HW division for years to come after losing to Tyson.

Tyson is one of those guys that people expect more of than they do from other fighters considered great. His resume is better than Marciano's aside from being undefeated. He did more than George Foreman.

The Hw division- its Louis, Lewis and Ali IMO, then it gets cloudy from there. There's not much that separates the great HWs outside the top 3.
 
Seano said:
Holmes was a factor in the HW division for years to come after losing to Tyson.

Tyson is one of those guys that people expect more of than they do from other fighters considered great. His resume is better than Marciano's aside from being undefeated. He did more than George Foreman.

The Hw division- its Louis, Lewis and Ali IMO, then it gets cloudy from there. There's not much that separates the great HWs outside the top 3.
Click to expand...

It's ironic that a guy who beat a top 5 greatest of all time is blamed for weak opposition. Some would even place Holmes higher than that.

I wish we had a Lewis fight in there with Rooney still the coach, no time off in prison etc. I think what hurt Tysons legacy the most was losing to his own generation. People didn't care that he beat someone who was better than Holyfield.
 
spacetime said:
How do you mean? Foreman beat Frazier twice and then made a comeback regaining the crown.
Click to expand...
Well, Tyson couldn't fight Frazier. I don't like how all time heavies lists are just a list of how guys did against Ali.Fighters should be judged by accomplishment, not name notoriety.

He just did more. Unified the HW titles (youngest boxer in history to do so), beat more title holders, more ranked guys etc. He basically defined the sport for almost 2 decades.
 
Tyson doesn’t get the credit he deserves for the Holmes win and also Spinks. Spinks was an undefeated gold medalist and Tyson ran him over. Tucker, Thomas, Biggs, Tubbs, Ruddock, Bruno etc were all as good as the contenders in any other era. Probably better than most eras actually.
 
ssx said:
Tyson doesn’t get the credit he deserves for the Holmes win and also Spinks. Spinks was an undefeated gold medalist and Tyson ran him over. Tucker, Thomas, Biggs, Tubbs, Ruddock, Bruno etc were all as good as the contenders in any other era. Probably better than most eras actually.
Click to expand...

Rogan argues that Spinks was in the "wrong" weight category. So Holmes over the hill, Spinks wrong weight class.
 
spacetime said:
Rogan argues that Spinks was in the "wrong" weight category. So Holmes over the hill, Spinks wrong weight class.
Click to expand...
BS, Spinks proved himself at HW. He beat Holmes twice and defended his title twice after that.

If Ezzard Charles is a good win for Marciano, then Spinks is a good win for Tyson.
 
spacetime said:
Rogan argues that Spinks was in the "wrong" weight category. So Holmes over the hill, Spinks wrong weight class.
Click to expand...

If you want to know what the wrong opinion about boxing is, it's generally Joe Rogan's opinion.
That is generally his least well educated topic.
 
Last edited:
spacetime said:
People always claim that Tyson never beat any all-time great and that the one he did beat was over the hill. Joe Rogan and his crew but also boxing folks....

Do these people forget that an even older Holmes went on to beat a peak Ray Mercer? Does this not validate Tysons win over Holmes?

To me it does... It proves that Holmes was not washed up. So what are these people on? They don't think beating a Young Ray Mercer is a scalp?
Click to expand...
This fight was ten years after Holmes won the title, coming off a two year layoff, after having lost to Spinks in consecutive fights. Tyson is an ATG but the Holmes he beat was clearly past his prime. It's still one of his best performances but doesn't dramatically move the needle in a historical perspective.
 
ssx said:
Tyson doesn’t get the credit he deserves for the Holmes win and also Spinks. Spinks was an undefeated gold medalist and Tyson ran him over. Tucker, Thomas, Biggs, Tubbs, Ruddock, Bruno etc were all as good as the contenders in any other era. Probably better than most eras actually.
Click to expand...
Spinks was in about as good a shape for that fight as Martinez was for Cotto. And he was PETRIFIED of Tyson going in.
 
Seano said:
BS, Spinks proved himself at HW. He beat Holmes twice and defended his title twice after that.

If Ezzard Charles is a good win for Marciano, then Spinks is a good win for Tyson.
Click to expand...
There's a bit of a difference there since Marciano and Charles were both around the same size, at about 185-190 pounds, and athletic. Spinks was about 35 pounds over his prime weight and wasn't in great condition when he fought Tyson.
 
It wasn't prime Holmes, but it's still a good win.
 
spacetime said:
People always claim that Tyson never beat any all-time great and that the one he did beat was over the hill. Joe Rogan and his crew but also boxing folks....

Do these people forget that an even older Holmes went on to beat a peak Ray Mercer? Does this not validate Tysons win over Holmes?

To me it does... It proves that Holmes was not washed up. So what are these people on? They don't think beating a Young Ray Mercer is a scalp?
Click to expand...
eh....Holmes was pretty old at that point.

Mercer was pretty up and down throughout his career. He lost to Jesse Feurgeson for god sakes
 
Seano said:
Holmes was a factor in the HW division for years to come after losing to Tyson.

Tyson is one of those guys that people expect more of than they do from other fighters considered great. His resume is better than Marciano's aside from being undefeated. He did more than George Foreman.

The Hw division- its Louis, Lewis and Ali IMO, then it gets cloudy from there. There's not much that separates the great HWs outside the top 3.
Click to expand...
I feel pretty comfortable saying that Foreman's resume is better than Mikes...
 
XThe GreatestX said:
eh....Holmes was pretty old at that point.

Mercer was pretty up and down throughout his career. He lost to Jesse Feurgeson for god sakes
Click to expand...
Old? He was 31. In his prime.
It was a couple of months after Mercers career defining KO of Morrison.
He also arguably beat Lewis AFTER that according to many.
 
StickAndMove said:
There's a bit of a difference there since Marciano and Charles were both around the same size, at about 185-190 pounds, and athletic. Spinks was about 35 pounds over his prime weight and wasn't in great condition when he fought Tyson.
Click to expand...
Spinks weighed 212, Tyson weight 216 for their fight.
Spinks and Tyson were both heavyweights.
He had won several fights at HW significant fights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,254,639
Messages
56,661,587
Members
175,336
Latest member
Swamps

Share this page

Back
Top