I was watching a thread for anyone marketable Holmes could have fought to break Marciano`s record instead of Spinks and Franks name came up, but I feel Spinks was a better fighter, what do you think and what would have happened if Larry had fought Bruno instead that year?
I'd go with Frank. Not too many fights out there when you get to pick the Bruno's/Weaver's/Berbick's/type guys to win hypothetical fights. But I'd take Frank via decision.
In 85 ?Not sure Mark tbh .He'd just lost to Smith and his confidence was dented.. But saying that he put on a good show against Spoon ,so the smaller man may not have fazed him .I'll say Frank comes in and looks excellent for the first 8 Rounds ,banging his jab in and cracking uppercut s .Spinks doesn't look that hot and even nervous in there. But around the tenth Bruno s anxiety takes over and Spinks goes on the attack. Bruno will get caught and drop his guard ,at which point ,the jinx steam's in throwing everything at Frank .When Bruno is no longer hitting back the ref jumps in .Frank will have been way ahead on the cards .
I don`t think Bruno would have taken Spinks`s shots better than Cooney did when he would start gassing about the half way point like he had a habit of doing I also feel Cooney himself would have KO`d Bruno with his devastating hook, that he couldn`t catch Spinks with in `86.
Cooney was strung out on drugs when he fought Spinks. Bruno wasn't know for being a drug addict. Bruno also took massive punches from Mike Tyson before he finally was stopped. Bruno himself had massive punching power. Spinks would probably freeze up against Frank like he did against Tyson. Bruno should be able to stop Spinks in a few rounds.
This might be a good match up for the bigger Bruno. He may possibly over power Spinks and put his lights out once he connects clean. This would be the best performance of Bruno's career though if he could pull out a win over the great Spinks. Spinks on the other hand would have to fight smart and wear Bruno down then swarm on him. In a 15 rounder I could see Spinks getting Bruno in the championship rounds stopping him while hes tired with a barrage of punches. In a 10 to 12 round fight if it went the distance I think it would be close. Really a toss up in this one I'd pick Spinks if I had to choose just because of being a better game day performer throughout his career.
Bruno would be dangerous early, Spinks is the better fighter overall though. I like Spinks to take over after 4 or 5 rounds, and he stops Bruno late.
The fight happening---In 85, it's a 10 round fight. That certainly helps the Bruno chances. Title fights were all tied up, so no title at stake. Maybe it could be turned into 12 rounds, but don't see the Bruno camp signing for the fight. But this fight had about a 3% chance of being made, at the time. Probably less than that. Futch did want a big physical heavyweight for Michael's initial venture into the division. And afterwards they did not want to experience wear and tear. And the conservative brain trust of Bruno are not taking on a live body or big threat for no-title. And then the Bruno folks are only taking the bout in the UK, & Spinks was no road warrior. The amount of money it would have taken to sign both guys to a contract would have lost the promoter 10 million, or more. Even after Spinks won the title against Holmes, there was zero talk of fighting live opponents. There were plenty of guys around and Spinks was stripped for not fighting Tony Tucker. Anyway you spin it, losing your title for not fighting a Tony Tucker does not speak volumes, it shouts. But that was the recently created IBF belt. Meanwhile, the other belts were consolidated by Mike Tyson though---he came along and cleared up that mess of not having multiple belts and not fighting each other. And he unified those belts in a heartbeat. After that, he fought Spinks. So he cleaned out the division of the title claimants and even the undefeated guy that had been stripped. Do you think for a nanosecond Spinks signs the contract for a Tyson bout if Mike holds just 1 title? How about the Spinks camp signing for a Tyson fight < Berbick, in say 85 or 86?
Spinks would come in with a sound gameplan, based on Bruno's (obvious) strengths and weaknesses. The Tyson disaster aside, there were few better fighters in that era at neutralising an opponent's strengths. In 1985 he was still close to his prime as well. Against Bruno, Spinks would probably look to present a moving target, get in and out, and score with the occasional flurry. He wasn't exactly smooth, but he was effective on the move, and he would have a speed advantage over Bruno. I think Bruno was at his best in the Lewis fight. In 1985 he was more liable to punch himself out, and he had less poundage to wear down the smaller man. He was "only" around the mid 220s in 1985, so there wouldn't be a huge weight advantage over Spinks. There is a chance that Spinks freezes in the face of Bruno's power, and gets bombed out of there. Coetzee aside though, most decent fighters tended to take Bruno rounds. I think it's more likely though that he can implement a strategy to draw Bruno's fire, win enough of the earlier rounds to keep it close on the cards, and then turn it on down the stretch. I don't think Bruno necessarily crumbles like Cooney did, as he wasn't as chinny as some make out and he had a big heart too, and a points win for Spinks is the most likely outcome.
I like Spinks by unanimous decision, or possibly a late TKO if the fight is 15 rounds. For those people saying that Michael Spinks froze against Tyson, can you show me where in the fight that this occurs? When I watch it, I see Sphinx standing his ground and throwing punches and definitely not freezing.
