I rewatched and rescored this one last night and I have to say I thought Michael Spinks had a legitimate claim at winning the fight. He definitely set out just to survive the first four rounds knowing that Holmes was going to go for an early knockout, but he stepped it up later on throwing his patented flurries to head and body which were scoring and winning rounds. Harold Lederman had it for Holmes by three points, but he didn't give Michael Spinks a round until the sixth. I had Spinks narrowly stealing the 5th. Likewise, he also gave Holmes round 12 and 14. I gave both of these rounds to Spinks. It's true, Holmes badly hurt Spinks in the 14th, but he was outlanded 3-1 otherwise. The only real hard shot he landed the entire round was a right hand that hurt Spinks, the rest of the three minutes he was dominated in terms of landing clean, effective punches. I didn't think that one right hand offset all of Spinks' good work. Holmes: 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10, 13 Spinks: 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15 I didn't actually note down the rounds because it was stupidly late at night, but I think I remember those being my scores. I could be wrong, I might of had the fight slightly in favour of Holmes, give or take a round. Overall point being, I don't think this fight was a robbery or a clear win for either man. Larry started fast but his work rate definitely came down as the rounds wore on, and this was when Spinks took advantage by throwing punches in bunches. I was very impressed by both men in this one. Larry turned up but Spinks stayed with him all the way anyway. Both fighters showed their exceptional jabs, and Larry actually threw his right hand in this one hurting Spinks on at least two occasions. Spinks landed some big shots, notably his left hook, but Holmes was unphased by anything he landed. Spinks was clearly too small to hurt Larry. I really liked this fight.
It's ages since I watched this but I had Holmes ahead at the end (but this fight was closer than their first, where Spinks was a comfortable winner for me). Boxing News has Spinks ahead too, if I recall.
I Remember finding it hard giving Holmes more than 4 rounds in their first fight. The second fight I scored it for Holmes in exactly the way Harold Lederman did for HBO - even with the sound down. Its like cooper v bugner, sometimes I feel there is often an unwritten rule among officials and promoters that if its close there is no mileage in letting an old champion keep his belt in his last fight.
How would you guys score round 14? [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBd0QFw9A_Y&feature=related[/ame] 4.38
Indeed. A really underrated fight, I think. Larry could have won the fight had he kept with Spinks for the last two rounds, but he was outlanded in both rounds fairly conclusively. He didn't even jump on Spinks when he hurt him in that 14th round. Big mistake.
Holmes:1,2,3,4,7,10,12, Spinks:5,6,8,9,11,14,13,15 Interesting to see Spinks have so much success here, despite Holmes being faded. Props to Spinks. *The hbo commentary is extremely biased, I wish I could watch fights with no commentary and just the sound of the fights. Lampley, Leonard and Ledderman all are extremely bias to holmes in my opinion.
Holmes came out for round 1 like a jacka**, acting like Mr. Bully. As great as Holmes was as a fighter, he was often times a boorish, childish a-hole. Tyson really humbled him though!
:good Good card, T. The commentary team seem to have disregarded all of the good work Spinks was doing in the 14th round as soon as Larry's right hand landed.
Well they all thought Spinks was about to be knocked out so I guess I can see that. But that was clearly a Spinks round in my opinion.
Hmm...I may need to see this again. I know I scored both fights 9-6, Spinks and then Holmes. Spinks was an awesome fighter BTW, and it's a shame that casual fans/the general forum don't realize this.
Michael Spinks is among the most under-appreciated fighters of all time, there's absolutely no question about that. I don't even think he gets the respect he deserves for these wins. It's true, Larry Holmes had seen better days, but Spinks went into these fights as a heavy underdog for a reason. He was much the smaller man and hadn't looked that great himself in his last few outings as a Light Heavyweight. I just got done watching Spinks' fight with Gerry Cooney. That's seen as a nothing win now but Spinks went into that fight as an underdog as well and was terribly undersized comparatively to Cooney. Do I think Michael Spinks was a great Heavyweight? No, but the performances he showed against Holmes over these two fights were nothing short of stellar. He out-jabbed Holmes on occasion, he out-fought Larry down the stretch of both fights, and he took some damn good shots in the process. Brilliant stuff.