Why doesn't Michael Spinks get more credit for Holmes I

It won't be till later (perhapslater this week) tonight at the earliest, but sure i would be interested to see what you and/or other might add.

 

I'm not saying it was a bad win. I'm just pointing out why I don't give Spinks the credit he would have if he had beaten a prime Holmes. That would have ranked among the very greatest wins ever. But, he didn't beat a prime Holmes, so he doesn't get the same amount of credit.

 

Tunney did not beat a prime dempsey either though if we are being fair.

 

you love boxing for sure. I don't think I would watch Holmes vs. Spinks either fight the whole way through unless I really had to.

 

Well my friend, I am not sure how long it has been since I have watched this fight??? Anyway, brilliant thread that probably needs some more discussion and evaluation of Spinks merits and the credit he deserves.

I concede....

Upon rewatching this I scored it 145-143 Spinks
If I had to do away w/ any even rounds I would go 144-141 Spinks

Holmes looked very old, slow and uninspired, not to detract from Michael's work. The right was there for most of the fight, every round the corner is begging him to let loose and he does not....Billy Conn probably gets more credit for losing than Spinks does for this accomplishment.

I don't include Tunney in my top 25 HW's so I doubt that I will move Spinks into that neighborhood either, but this is definately an undercelebrated performance.

I will agree w/ Mag that this is not a fight that I would desire to watch very often....Holmes was very lethatgic and most of the action is dictated by Spinks who kept Holmes off balanced and for whatever reason hesitant to unload....

 

I've made the point even recently that it's an incredible achievement. Sees Mike rank in the 31-40 bracket of my top 100.

 

I remember a thread on this forum many moons ago asking what was greater, Duran-Barkley or Spinks-Holmes 1 .... loads of people here actually picked Duran's win as better. Shows how favoured some fighters are and how easily dismissed others are.


Michael Spinks had never fought any fighter over 175 pounds when he stepped in with Larry Holmes, a great heavyweight and a legit 220 pounder. Holmes was not at his best by any means, but there's no way on earth a light-heavy should be able to come straight up into the HW ranks and beat a guy who was 48-0 and champ for 7 years at heavyweight.

 

Holmes looked very flat the previous two years and two of his wins looked suspect. No reflexes either

 

That was started by Addie, and although I picked Spinks-Holmes I was swayed by solid reasoning.

Duran was more faded, at a higher weight and scored a knockdown of his much bigger foe.

It's understandable.

 

Hell I think people give Billy Conn more credit for losing to Joe Louis than they give Spinks for beating Holmes.

 

Even though I don't think Holmes was the best hw out there when Spinks beat him. I don't think Dempsey was when Tunney beat him neither.

Also Holmes is better than Dempsey both h2h and legacy wise.

All in I think this is a better victory than Tunney over Dempsey despite Spinks not looking as good.

Tunney is a greater hw though because he has more victories over decent names. Plus he was never Tyson'd.

 

I thought spoon not only beat him handily but also beat the number 1 contender that Holmes ducked.

Spoon, Thomas, Berbick all beat that version of Holmes imo.

 

Similar to what I am doing w/ Addie above in regards to Holmes/Spinks I, are you interested in rewatching the Holmes/Spoon fight and comparing cards (either in this thread or a seperate one?)?

I can understand the fact that you felt that Spoon won...many others do, and like this thread I may reconsider (Lord knows I would love to score for a Philly boy!)....But you stated that Holmes was not viewed as TRUE Champ??? I was curious as to if that was a wide held belief, as I don't remember encountering that as a prevailing thought process?

 

Spinks: 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
Holmes: 1, 5, 8, 9, 15

I scored the second round even, otherwise I had Spinks winning handily.

 

Anyone thinking Witherspoon "handily beat" Holmes has an agenda against Holmes or just doesn't know how to score a fight. There isn't a soul here who could intelligently argue that a decisive victory either way.