holmes wasnt on a losing streak!...he beat spinks...oh yes he did twice!= yes i believe this aswell first fight spinks didnt do enough to take title and 2nd fight holmes was robbedOriginally Posted by MR T
holmes wasnt on a losing streak!...he beat spinks...oh yes he did twice!...and i read a few articles that holmes trained for 6 weeks and if thats true 6 weeks is plenty....perhaps he should of had a couple tune ups ayOriginally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
difference is holmes had 2 years ring rust and was on losing streak plus he had 2 weeks to train he did better against holy because he had more time to train and didnt have rust and was on good winning streak recently beating very tough ray mercerOriginally Posted by MR T
but holmes went on to give holyfield all sorts of trouble when he was even older and more shot as you put it?Originally Posted by SweetPea
Big difference. None of those guys was anywhere near as good or had nearly as many weapons as Bowe did in his prime. None of those guys you listed is in Bowe's class.Originally Posted by spanky-banky
you forget mike fought quite a few boxers in his prime-biggs-tucker-holmes-williams-thomas and had all of them on the run except for williams who try acually fighting tyson and look what happend...
(Obviously Holmes was a great fighter, but we're talking here about an old, shot Holmes.)
No offense, but you're nuts if you think that. Holmes was 38 years old when he fought Tyson. He was a shell of his former self. He would've been KO'd by Bowe as well.And that version of larry holmes would have beatin bowe...........just an opinion![]()
and ill tell you what holy was lucky because holmes was coming on strong last 3 rounds and holy started to look tired i scored it 7 rounds to 5 holy very tough nights work for holy thats for sure
but i dont think more training and tune ups would have help holmes much...holmes was to old for young tyson larry would have to be in his prime to beat tyson.![]()


Thanks:
Likes:
Dislikes: 


Reply With Quote
Bookmarks