Michael Spinks vs Eddie Davis

Cautious boxer-punchers with good mobility seemed to be a bit of a gap in Spink's armour

 

Thats why you could argue Jones over Spinks IMO. Though this fight is different.

My memory of this fight is cloudy but I remember Davis made Spinks look terrible and only just fell short...Wouldn't mind watching it again and I just noticed it's on the tube now.

 

Davis won the fight. Spinks missed a lot of punches. Yet IIRC the decision was lopsided in favor of Spinks. In fact I think one judge only gave Davis one or two rounds.

 

Had Davis by a point, admittedly I was searching to give him rounds a bit to confirm my assumption that Spinks wasn't that great.

Either way fight in all honesty.

 

Typical outcome in the sport when a big fight is on the horizon. Any sort of controversy goes to the advantage of the guy with the upcoming big $$ bout. Follow the money.

 

Horrific night for Spinks but I still had him edging the fight.

Davis' approach has made many greats look poor.

 

I had Eddie Davis winning the fight.

Spinks got the decision for being Spinks, as Davis was unheralded.

 

Hardly Everett-Escalara though was it?

 

Haven't seen it since it took place, thought at the time Davis edged it. Will watch it again if its on youtube and score it properly. One thing I always remember about it though was that Davis really showed what a bit of versatility and mobility did to Spinks' game.

 

Spinks never looked too cultured or intelligent a stylist to me against the better balanced fighters he faced, it was usually his punching that eventually impressed rather than his skills(not to say they looked bad per se).That was the case even with a fading yaqui Lopez.

Dwight was a highly skilled barrel shaped midget with a very specific set of tools and avenue of approach open to him.Great fight by Spinks no denying, but there is a strong element of styles\physical limitations make fights and a good amount of credit to go for the famed corner strategy there.

Could actually be this very specifically styled pair might fair quite similarly against the field of more generically textbook styled boxer-punchers 175 has had over the years, and struggle against similar elements(movement, defensive nous, careful straight punching in ones and twos rather than volume...).Even though Spinks is generally taken as the more versatile of the two.

 

I'm a Spinks man, but Eddie may have edged this.

 

This inspired one of the more interesting comments Steve Farhood wrote about a match he witnessed ringside. Scoring it live, he had Michael the winner. A week later, he scored it off the videotape replay, and had Eddie taking the decision. He expressed the difference between eyewitness observation and footage presentation.

Watching at home, I thought Eddie might have shaded it, but was glad Michael retained because I couldn't stomach any title changing hands over a decision shorter than the championship distance. [In fact I did eventually stop watching boxing, and became a former fan as a result of this.]

 

I gave it to Spinks and think he undertrained. He did very well in the early rounds but was huffing and losing it midway through. From what I recall he looked clearly Davis' better until that point.

 

I think Davis gave him his toughest fight and had Spinks hurt. I remember thinking Spinks lost.