Do you think it's fair that Mike is belittled for this but George is praised?

Hmmm, let’s see. Foreman was literally obese, twenty years removed from his prime, & two months away from his 46th birthday. Moorer was at his peak.

Tyson was in his prime, at the height of his powers, & an end-of-the-line Spinks quit outright, feigning a KO after barely mustering the inner-strength to enter the arena.

But who is belittling Tyson for his win?

 

came here to comment this, but you did it for me

 

Part one is true, part two is nonsense .. Spinks was in his physical prime, twice edging what we later saw to be a still very good Holmes ... he was just a terrible stylistic match up for a prime Tyson. Like Marvin Frazier, small heavyweights without super world class heavyweight chins were made to order for that Mike ...

 

I don't think Spinks feigned a KO. He got his bell rung. Watch how his head hit the canvas. If he was faking it, he wouldn't have let his head hit the deck like that.

 

I prefer to look at his lucid eyes of terror as he watches the ref count him out.

 

Physical prime? His knees want a chat with you.

 

Tyson gets plenty of praise for the Spinx win. Spinx and Holmes were the only elite A class opponents he beat. When people pick a version of Tyson for H2H matchups, the one who KOd Spinx is often cited as one of the best.

 

*Sphinx.

 

Moorer is 6 ft 2 just like Spinks and weighed like another 10-15 pounds more at HW. He is probably the biggest LHW champ ever and Moorer and Spinks are probably the 2 biggest. Also I don't think this is a thing. If Tysons belittled for his opponents Michael Spinks is not the issue and if he is being a LHW is not the issue its he was gone a few years and basically gave up.

Spinks is not more accomplished than Moorer at HW. Spinks is 4-1 at HW, Moorer was 13-0 at HW when he fought Foreman and was the best HW champ with a belt during Foremans reign until he lost to Holyfield and retired a few years. He was 17-2. Moorer beat 6 HW contenders to Spinks 3.

 

Moorer wasn't a career light heavyweight. Comparing him and Spinks as light heavyweights transitioning to heavyweight is inherently flawed to put it mildly.

Moorer made light heavyweight for 2 years and 9 months. Spinks was a light heavyweight for 8 whopping years. That's a career light heavyweight who made the mental choice to campaign at heavyweight.

Spinks was often coming in around 172 and 173, he was 170 1/2 in his second to last fight at 175. It was well known Moorer was struggling to make 175 even during his 5 minute stint there. Heck, Moorer jumped from 175 to 213 4 months after his last bout at 175. Chalk and cheese.

Most give Tyson decent credit for pole axing Spinks and many who don't don't give him much credit for anything. As already stated Foreman's age and other factors hugely influence the status of his win over Moorer.

 

It’s not so much the opponent, more so retaining the title after that long, and also becoming the oldest heavyweight world champion in history, a record that stands to this day.

 

It's very telling that no one has beaten Foreman's record for decades despite all the advancements in sports science, medicine, training methods, etc to keep athletes closer to their peak even after they turn 30. It's not easy to win a championship in your 40's, certainly not against a prime undefeated opponent. The fact Foreman lost a bunch of weight and came out of a 10 year retirement makes it even more remarkable.