Michael Spinks vs Prime Gerry Cooney

Yes! I love that era of light heavies best by far.

 

I would say Michael has a slim chance, but this would be a Cooney who's confidence hasn't been shattered fully. So I am going with Cooney by mid round stoppage.

 

Cooney would have caught up to Michael. Michael was nearly knocked silly in the 14th round of the second Holmes fight, by a punch that wasn't even Larry's best shot. Once Cooney starts landing the hook flush it would be over.

Might be a bit like what happened to Foster (perhaps an even greater light-heavy than Michael and certainly a better puncher) against Frazier.
That's 82 Cooney against 85 Michael.

 

the same young that did beat Foreman? In 1980 and lyle? 2 shot fighters... Please better delete this trash part of your comment

 

seven years earlier and a serious training camp to go with it might have made the difference between victory and defeat for Cooney. But I have to respect Michael Spinks as being a very tough, savvy and brilliant all time great fighter. Regardless of the outcome I don’t see this as being an easy fight for either man barring of course a perfectly timed lucky bomb...

 

Well, I see your point. I just don't agree with Spinks being a brilliant all time fighter. He was an utterly fantastic, top 5 light-heavy ATG and was cunning to pick his time to hit the heavyweights. Overall his stint as a heavyweight was remarkable only in that he beat a three years past it Holmes and was gifted the rematch against an even more past it Holmes.

But that's just my opinion.

 

The second half of your post is fair and agreeable. But it’s kinda hard to dispute that Michael Spinks was “ an all time great brilliant fighter “ unless you’re just excluding his heavyweight career which I concur was short and limited.

 

If you read the entire comment and not just pick out what suited your argument, you would see I did say they were beyond their primes... But judging by how you write you should delete everything you've posted.

 

Cooney KO1. Sorry Spinks was just very unproven to me at Heavyweight. He had 5 fights at Heavy. One against a no-name and three against shot fighters, two of which many feel (myself included) he was very lucky to win. The one time he faced a heavyweight in his prime (granted he hadn't fought in over a year and his knees were shot) he didn't even make it into the triple digits in seconds.

 

This content is protected

 

I'm not a fan of Cooney at all and think he was seriously overrated. But I believe that Spinks is even more overrated in order to give Tyson more credit.

 

I did the read the complete post. And the rest of the post does not change this absurd part. You said clearly "the same young who beat Foreman".
So Holmes Did beat Ali " the same Ali who beat Foreman"

Judging by how i write? I am writing in your idiom. Can you even write 5 coherent words in spanish?

my way of writing in english can be improved but what you wrote is rubbish at any language

 

Cooney stops him after a couple of rounds.

 

Spinks knocks him out.