Holmes v Foreman

Who wins?

Holmez for me. His jab and movement would have been too much for the slower George. Holmes' better stamina would have been telling also.

What say you?

I agree. Jab and movement lessen the risk of George's early onslaught, if anything does get through Holmes has the chin and more importantly recovery to eek through it, then Big George begins to gas and Holmes takes over.

Holms KO/TKO in the 11/12th (or 13-15th if old school rounds).

Wouldn't be so sure of a Holmes win, Holmes was never in with great quality in their prime until Witherspoon.

I fancy George might have clubbed Holmes to death. It't not like George couldn't take a punch either.

It's a close call this one..........People forget though Holmes was a better boxer he had a tendency to make stupid mistakes.....Had Earnie been more careful and Snipes had more time the heavy title changes hands.........Also wobbled and hurt by Terrible Tim....

It's all about the early rounds...........If Holmes gets through six he wins.........If he gets caught though I expect Foreman to finish him a la Norton.......

Close to pickem but I call it for Larry by ko10..........

George ko<6. Larry brilliant but hit far too often - he gets knocked down 8 times and the referee steps in. Larry Drop kicks the referee and grates a lemon on his asss

Holmes never got hurt in the early rounds.

Did against Tyson........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Did against Tyson........

He was past it then.

Do you think he could have survived long enough by making Foreman work hard and then watch Foreman gas? That is a scenario I could see, but still fancy Foreman putting too many bombs in there for Larry to avoid.

Conversely Foreman was a similar animal to Tyson..........Plus Holmes beat Mercer later on.......to suggest he could still kick it..

Holmes was past his best but he still struggled with hard hitting fighters...because he was accident prone.........

Think the problem we have when analysing fights like this is..........

1. We prefer certain fighters..............So big up their positives and big up their opponents negatives...

2. Forget how the styles mesh..

3. Look at fights like Ali-foreman and forget Ali had the best chin in heavy history with Jeffries...

4. Holmes had a good chin and not a great one........

5. Holmes couldn't stop foreman early and so George does have a window of opportunity to land........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Think the problem we have when analysing fights like this is..........

1. We prefer certain fighters..............So big up their positives and big up their opponents negatives...

2. Forget how the styles mesh..

3. Look at fights like Ali-foreman and forget Ali had the best chin in heavy history with Jeffries...

4. Holmes had a good chin and not a great one........

5. Holmes couldn't stop foreman early and so George does have a window of opportunity to land........

Spot on Truss,Holmes was one of my favourite fighters of all time so very hard for me to back against him, so would big up Holmes jab and boxing skills and hope he can avoid Foremans bombs and Foreman blows himself out and Holmes stops him late on.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:3. Look at fights like Ali-foreman and forget Ali had the best chin in heavy history with Jeffries...

Chuvalo??

I think it is such a shame that these two never fought. I think it would have been an absolute classic. Holmes boxing from range whilst Foreman applying relentless pressure and looking for the big KO. I think Larry has a lapse of concentration and George catches him and puts him down at least twice, but Larry's great recuperation and ring savvy allows him to either box to a draw or a very close SD win.

Mr Bounce wrote:I think it is such a shame that these two never fought. I think it would have been an absolute classic. Holmes boxing from range whilst Foreman applying relentless pressure and looking for the big KO. I think Larry has a lapse of concentration and George catches him and puts him down at least twice, but Larry's great recuperation and ring savvy allows him to either box to a draw or a very close SD win.

Larry claimed George ducked him in the early 90s whilst hinting it would have been little short of a mismatch because Foreman 'couldn't fight'.
The chip on Holmes' shoulder once again coming to the fore.

EdWoodjr wrote:

Mr Bounce wrote:I think it is such a shame that these two never fought. I think it would have been an absolute classic. Holmes boxing from range whilst Foreman applying relentless pressure and looking for the big KO. I think Larry has a lapse of concentration and George catches him and puts him down at least twice, but Larry's great recuperation and ring savvy allows him to either box to a draw or a very close SD win.

Larry claimed George ducked him in the early 90s whilst hinting it would have been little short of a mismatch because Foreman 'couldn't fight'.
The chip on Holmes' shoulder once again coming to the fore.

Not quite a chip but an eric pickles on his shoulder

Holmes gets my vote.

If we're judging both fighters at their absolute bests and on their best nights, then I see Holmes out boxing Foreman for a clear decision.

A good boxer with balls beats Foreman 8 times out of 10.

Guess Frazier, Norton and Lyle didn't have any then....... 

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Guess Frazier, Norton and Lyle didn't have any then....... 

Frazier wasn't known for being a boxer, no one ever compared him to Sugar Ray Robinson. He had balls though, but he was more of a slugger than a boxer. He had wrong style to fight Foreman.

Norton looked scared when he fought Foreman. So yes, he needed more balls.

Lyle too, had the wrong style for Foreman, though I guess he came closer than many to beat Foreman.

Jimmy Young though was good enough to beat Foreman.

You have to dance like Robinson to be a good boxer ???...You think If Frazier was a mindless brawler and couldn't box Ali struggles with him for 41 rounds......

You are really patronising Foreman..

I never said or suggested that Frazier was a mindless brawler. I said he was more of a slugger than boxer...never said he couldn't box.

I think that boxers were the ones that gave Foreman the most trouble and I think that someone like Holmes who could box, and who I never saw enter the ring looking intimidated, would be Foreman's worst type of opponent.

It's a hard one I think, I would be hard pressed to pick a winner, but if I had to pick one I'd go for big George. The only fight I remeber Holmes going to the trenches was his championship winning fight against Norton.I think Foreman was a bigger puncher than Holmes and both could take a punch.If it went the distance then I'd probably go for Holmes.

Got to go with Holmes- at his best he's better than the '74 version of Ali or Jimmy Young. Holmes is better in every department except for punching power than George. He would have to survive a few scary moments, but there's nothing in his career to suggest that he couldn't survive them. Holmes by comfortable decision or possibly even a late stoppage is George doesn't pace himself.

Foreman KO within 7.

It's a tough one this. If you had to design a Foreman beater a decent mover with a greay jab, reciperative skills, heart and stamina would be the best ingredients, so Holmes would seem like the perfect candidate.

Foreman in his prime was so, so good at closing off space and landing accurate shots. Of course he was also so ridiculously powerful that glancing blows could scramble people's brains momentarily. Also, Holmes wasn't a weak puncher, but he wasn't a power puncher either, and Foreman had a solid jaw.

I back Foreman 6 out of 10. Despite Larry's undoubted brilliance, he was caught by inferior boxers and hurt by inferior punchers. Foreman's a much better finisher than Shavers. The thing with a puncher is that they only need ten seconds to win the fight.

I'd back early nineties Foreman over early nineties Holmes with more confidence.

Surprised by your elevaluation of the 90's versions JBW- George was so slow by then, and as showed by Morrison, Holyfield and for 9 rounds, Moorer he was relatively easy to out box, where as Larry showed against Mercer, he was still plenty smart when he needed to be. Holmes by wide UD for me.

elevaluation...........

Is that when you analyse something going up in an elevator..........Horizontal?? 

You Brits you have an amazing way with words...

sounds like a word George W. could have come up with doesn't it- truth is that I'm a hopeless typist- hence why most of my posts a pretty short, I'd love to post the sort of responses you get from Chris88, but that would take me the best part of a week.

I'd back George. But I wouldnt put any money on it, unless it was someone else's... and they didnt want it back..

Even then I'd probably just keep the money

Yeah, Holmes' movement wasn't good enough then for me to back him and Foreman was still so powerful and hard to dent with anything. He also stayed dangerous for the full 12.

Foreman late KO or Holmes pulled out by his corner.