Michael Spinks vs Holyfields HW title defenses?

Foreman will get him eventually. Spinks at light heavy had his size and power to help deal with brawlers. His awkwardness works on a boxer like Holmes but isn't going to befuddle Old George who will patiently keep slugging until Michael is out.

An old Holmes is accustomed to his weirdness and knows how to deal with him, but can he? He cut it close even in the second fight and the loss of his reflexes sure isn't going to help tip this one in his flavor. Spinks by decision

Depends entirely on whether spinks get caught with a good hook; and if so able to recover? Winnable but dangerous for Spinks.

Until he gets fed-up of being outboxed by a light-heavy and hits him with the same kidney punch that made a dent in Qawi's side.

This content is protected

^For a reformed god fearing man, that sure was a spiteful thing to do.

 

Qawi is a come forward aggressive fighter not really comparable to Spinks who would be on the outside giving Foreman angles and befuddling him.

Morrison outboxed Foreman completely, Moorer did it for 9 rounds, Schultz comprehensively outboxed Foreman aswell.

Spinks can definitely mirror the performances of Morrison, Schultz.

 

The Morrison and Schulz bouts are 2 years and 4 years removed from the version who faced Holyfield - and both of them had to risk shipping some Foreman leather at some point - and indeed did take some lumps. Their respective successes, regardless, were in large part due to them being strong enough to engage with Big George for short spells and do well out of the exchanges.

I don't see Spinks replicating their wins, unless he's apt to taking Foreman's power - and he really isn't, in my view.

He's more likely to use the Cat'n'Mouse tactics that he did against a Holmes, who was visibly hesitant and jaded in their first match. This approach is not as effective against '91 Foreman and, in any event, carries the inherent risk of being viewed poorly by the judges (and every other spectator) and him losing the decision.

I favor the Foreman of '91 to do the job on Spinks.

 

Morrison didn't engage much with Foreman he played the cat and mouse game as you pointed out, fighting a very cautious fight only looking to land occasional big punch here and there which is what Spinks could do.

Morrison is no defensive master or master boxer yet he was able to befuddle Foreman and win a relatively easy decision on the cards.

Morrison is bigger than Spinks but I don't see that hes much more durable than Spinks, hes notably got a glass chin and yet he was able to ship a few blows from Foreman without ever really being troubled.

Holyfield took more chances vs Foreman because he has a granite chin and likes to mix it up, hence Foreman had a bit more success vs Holyfield. But I still don't think that fight tells us alot about how a fight vs Spinks would ago, as Spinks would be a more tricky style wise for Foreman to really pin down and Spinks wouldn't be exchanging punches with big George

 

Your case is fair enough in that I understand how you're seeing it and it is not unreasonable. I just don't think you can beat Foreman without taking chances and I also have a fairly conservative opinion of Spinks as a heavyweight.

I'd also suggest that while Morrison would not typically attract the nomenclature "defensive master or master boxer", he put in the performance of his career against that later version of Foreman, in my opinion. He did remain on the move and pick his moments, but those moments were very well executed - frustrating Foreman with fast, hard, well-selected combinations and shaking off anything that came back, before moving on out again. I'd even go as far as to say that his work was much cleaner than that of Spinks - against, say, Holmes (I).

I'll no doubt be re-watching those fights mentioned here, at some point in future, so the view could change - but I am quite convinced that there was a sufficient enough of a drop in Foreman's execution after '91 to make the comparison with the Morrison bout a tad unreliable.

For now, I'll stick with '91 Foreman to win, late.

 

I don't believe Spinks would survive any legitimately ranked in the top ten
aggressive power punching natural heavyweight from the 1960's until the early 2000's.
I see Spinks as possibly the greatest Lt.heavy in history, but smartly
matched at heavyweight until he faced Tyson.
And that fight was a big money grab, and a retirement plan.

 

Didn’t he beat cooney though? I mean I agree I think old Foreman would beat Spinks. Holyfield had to dig deep to win that fight and I don’t think Spinks would have lasted in the late rounds. I also agree with the general sentiment, but none at all?

 

Bert Cooper is an easy win for Michael Spinks, probably by stoppage. That type of agresssive fighter are guys Spinks beat his whole career.

Larry Holmes would be an easy decision win. Holmes was worse (more stationary/had to fight off the ropes) in 1992 than he was in 1985. Even with less movement, he vomited all over the ring after 12 against Holyfield. If Michael made Larry chase him around the ring, he may have tired Holmes out and stopped Larry late.

Of course, George Foreman is the big question. Both stopped Gerry Cooney. Spinks did it first (nearly three years earlier) against an arguably better version of Cooney (who had scored a knockout win over Eddie Gregg a year earlier.)

By the time George fought Gerry, Cooney hadn't won a fight in four years.

Michael didn't hit as hard as Holyfield but he moved better than Evander did. Movement bothered George. Tommy Morrison moved enough to outpoint George.

I'll go out on a limb and say, using a similar style to Jimmy Young (and Michael Spinks was better than Jimmy Young), Spinks can outpoint 42-year-old George over 12. And if George gives him the opportunity to let Spinks plant and unload like he did on Cooney, Michael might even be able to jar Foreman.

If it goes 12, George probably isn't winning on points. Spinks threw too many combinations to get outpointed.

But George stopped former light heavyweight Michael Moorer, so one right hand could do the trick.

 

I don't believe Cooney was ranked in the top 10" in 1987. If he was, it wasn't legitimate. Cooney had not been serious about boxing since the Holmes fight, preferring to party and use drugs and alcohol.
There were at least 10-15 contenders far more deserving of a title shot.
Spinks choose Cooney for the same reasons May Jr choose most of his welter and above competition. Most money for the less risk......

 

Agreed.

Cooney was an utter wreck at that point - an almost tragic figure. His performance - if one can even refer to it as that - against Spinks, was pitiful. He had essentially capitulated, before the end of the first round.

Certainly no gauge for how Spinks would do against a prime, top contender.

 

That's my point. There's no meat on the bone for Spinks at heavyweight.
It's all yeah but's . Yes on the record he beat Holmes twice but most felt the 1st fight could've easily been ruled a draw, and the 2nd fight Holmes actually won. And behind the scenes a lot of the boxing media of that time wanted Holmes to lose before he broke Marciano's record.
Holmes could've beaten the hell out of Spinks and may still have lost if he didn't flat out ko him.
The venom for Holmes possibly breaking Marciano's record was that serious.
That venom it was lead Holmes to say " Marciano couldn't carry my jockstrap ".
Which he did apologize for.
So Spinks victories at heavyweight were an old Holmes x2, Cooney and a Tangstad, whatever that is.
And was blasted out of the ring by Tyson a little longer than it takes to get done with a good pee......
A lot of Holyfield's opponents beat him in my opinion.

 

I don't know. Bowe, Lewis, and Mercer are all possible Spinks victims

 

Mercer I can see losing to Spinks. Bowe and Lewis ? Highly doubtful. Especially Lewis

 

Spinks is not handling the wear and tear of fighting heavies.

 

especially Lewis and Bowe?
It's your opinion, you're certainly welcome to that.
I believe all three of them would ko him with in 10rds his best vs their best.
So would Foreman,possibly Cooper and Moorer and many other heavyweights Holyfield fought.
Spinks career at heavyweight was smoke and mirrors....
My opinion.