Michael Spinks vs Evander Holyfield at Heavyweight:Who wins?

I think Evander always wins over 200 lbs unless we really get selective about which versions we match. Perhaps if we took both of them in their very first heavyweight bouts, the Spinks from the first Holmes fight vs Holyfield from the tillis bout, then I might pick spinks to edge him in a decision win. But anytime beyond that and it's basically all Evander.

 

Holyfield was a very inconsistent guy. Michael's awkward, quirky movement would give him a lot of trouble. Holyfield at his absolute best would probably be too strong for Spinks, but Evander lost to a lot of guys he should've beaten, so it wouldn't surprise me if Spinks outmaneuvered him.


Generally, I have trouble jumping on the Holyfield bandwagon. I think much of his reputation is built upon the post-jail Tyson. But look at the guys who beat him:

Chris Byrd - tiny, feather-fisted
John Ruiz - many people think he beat Holy two out of 3
James Toney - short, former middleweight, SAME AGE AS HOLY
Larry Donald - talented but disappointing trial horse
Ibragimov - remember him? It's hard to remember him isn't it?
Moorer- generally maligned, shaky chin, etc.

You can't always blame age for things. Lewis or Vlad would never lose to these guys no matter how old they were.

 

By the time Michael Spinks moved up to heavyweight, he was having a lot of problems with his knees and legs. He blamed it on years of running with work boots on. But in his later fights, he routinely had to tape one or both knees.

I'd actually give a 175-pound Spinks who recently beat Eddie Mustafa Muhammad the best chance of beating a cruiserweight or heavyweight Holyfield, even with the weight disadvantage. That Spinks could punch and he could get more power out of his legs.

But I think Evander would be a clear favorite to win over Spinks at heavyweight. Evander was reaching his prime when he moved up, while Spinks was concluding his career.

 

You can blame age for many things in athletics.

If you think a 28-year-old Holyfield is the same fighter he was at 45 when he lost to Ibragmov, that's insane.

(Oh, and Toney was six years YOUNGER than Holyfield. They weren't the same age.)

Holyfield was an excellent fighter. An all-time great. A smaller guy with speed might give even a younger Evander problems.

But when Evander moved up to heavyweight, he was just approaching his peak as a fighter. When Spinks moved up, he was not at his peak anymore.

At his best, Evander wins against everyone you listed above.

Against Spinks at his best, I'd give Evander the edge. But it's a competitive fight. Spinks might out-hustle him.

 

Holyfield by Dec.

 

You're negging Holyfield for fights that he lost when he was 38-45. Sure, superheavyweights his age probably would have won those fights, but I don't see what that has to do with his ability to fight Mike Spinks in his heavyweight prime.

And while I agree that Holyfield gets overrated a bit as an ATG heavyweight, he's the Real Deal as an ATG p4p fighter.

 

Holy was the more complete fighter. Holy by TKO down the stretch.

 

Easy win for Holyfield.

 

Because, when he got older, he had leg and knee (cartilage) problems. They were well documented.

When you're a young, strong running back in the NFL, you can drive with your legs. When your cartilage is wrecked or gone, you can't. When you're a boxer, same thing. (Sergio Martinez had problems with his knees and legs, too, at the end. It happens.)

Spinks actually wore knee braces training for Tyson, his legs were so wrecked.

Spinks had one-punch KO power as a young light heavyweight. He blasted out guys with very good chins like Marvin Johnson, Yaqui Lopez, and flattened Eddie Mustafa. If he could put those guys down, he'd have the power to keep Holyfield "honest."

And with the speed and quickness of his light heavy days, I think he'd be able to compete with Evander.

I still think Holyfield wins. But a younger, lighter Spinks would've been more dangerous than an older, stationary, nagging-leg-injuries version of Spinks.

 

Actually no way Ruiz won 2 of 3. 1st fight was close, 2nd won by Ruiz, and in 3rd Holy dominated

Toney is 6 years younger than Holyfield, that's a fact. Toney at 41 (Holyfield's age from Toney fight) lost to some jorneymen.

Need to say that Byrd, Toney, Ibragimov, Ruiz and Donald beat Holyfield whose prime was 10-15 years prior

 

I don't know when he said he wasn't punching at the weight. He was one of the division's better punchers.

I was a fan of Michael Spinks. I followed him before and after he won the light heavyweight title. He didn't fight until he was an old man by any means, but he was better when he was younger. Toward the end of his light heavy run, and into his heavyweight run, he had leg issues that made him less than what he once was.

I know people like fighters to be closer in weight, but I think the light heavy Spinks from 1980-1983 would've done just fine with Holyfield. Better than a heavyweight version of Spinks would've fared.

Just my opinion, though.