how would frank bruno done against larry holmes

**spanky-banky** · 03-08-2007 01:05 AM

but even if bruno beat holmes no one would give him credit for it cause holmes was old

.......Tyson never gets credit for that win so why would bruno?

ICB · 03-08-2007 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by MR T

but even if bruno beat holmes no one would give him credit for it cause holmes was old

.......Tyson never gets credit for that win so why would bruno?

bruno would of got tons of credit holmes was champ at that time reason why tyson doesnt get credit for win is because holmes was old had been retired for 2 years and had 2 weeks to train and still made good account of himself

**spanky-banky** · 03-08-2007 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING

Originally Posted by MR T

but even if bruno beat holmes no one would give him credit for it cause holmes was old

.......Tyson never gets credit for that win so why would bruno?

bruno would of got tons of credit holmes was champ at that time reason why tyson doesnt get credit for win is because holmes was old had been retired for 2 years and had 2 weeks to train and still made good account of himself

holmes trained for 2 weeks

.....more like 6 weeks but i disagree with holmes making a good account of himself in that fight he didnt land anything and ran for 4 rds and then tyson smeared his old a$$ across the canvas.....tyson would beat the undefeated holmes that fought spinks also but prime 4 prime is a different story.....................i think tyson deserves credit for knocking a man out that has never been koed

**porkypara** · 03-08-2007 01:43 AM

Originally Posted by MR T

Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING

Originally Posted by MR T

but even if bruno beat holmes no one would give him credit for it cause holmes was old

.......Tyson never gets credit for that win so why would bruno?

bruno would of got tons of credit holmes was champ at that time reason why tyson doesnt get credit for win is because holmes was old had been retired for 2 years and had 2 weeks to train and still made good account of himself

holmes trained for 2 weeks

.....more like 6 weeks but i disagree with holmes making a good account of himself in that fight he didnt land anything and ran for 4 rds and then tyson smeared his old a$$ across the canvas.....tyson would beat the undefeated holmes that fought spinks also but prime 4 prime is a different story.....................i think tyson deserves credit for knocking a man out that has never been koed

How come Holmes had so little time to train wheather it is 2 or 6 weeks?

**spanky-banky** · 03-08-2007 02:00 AM

6 weeks is plenty time to train

**porkypara** · 03-08-2007 02:05 AM

Originally Posted by MR T

6 weeks is plenty time to train

It is an ok amount of time if you are in good shape when you start your training camp.

After a 2 year layoff I very much dout that Holmes was in tip top condition.

But as I asked why did he only have 6 weeks?