I just read that Bert Sugar has Roy Jones 88th on his greatest fighters list

Too right, Rico.

In truth, and I believe it to be true, a large quantity of posters that are regulars on the General Forum have not seen the likes of Michael Spinks in action. They watch Roy Jones Jr take apart these second rate fighters, and assume he was the greatest ever based on his aesthetically pleasing style. In reality, Michael Spinks beat much better opposition than Roy Jones Jr and although he may not have demonstrated a similar level of speed and reflexes as Jones, his power was discombobulating. His awkward style, the way he delivered his punches in clusters, would have really upset Jones' timing. Spinks was a pretty huge Light Heavyweight too.

Leaving Michael Spinks off that list isn't only criminal, it's damn right embarrassing. A lock for top 50, as high as top 40. He beat better opposition as a Light Heavyweight than Jones Jr, and beat better opposition as a Heavyweight than Jones Jr. End of story, end of paragraph.

 

I agree with you that Spinks should be on the list, but lets be fair.... Roy Jones took apart a lot of 1st rate fighters, and looked very good doing it.:yep

 

Jones and Tyson should both be in the top thirty.
But more importantly why isn't De La Hoya and Pacquiao both who have been considered the greatest of all time by many of ESBers rated #'s 1 and 2. Isn't that a complete shock to those here?

 

He should be on the list, and ahead of a lot of fighters who get worshiped like a god on this forum. Roy Jones, for example. Roy looked great beating Toney and a green Hopkins, and I take nothing away from him, but I dare anyone to deny that Spinks beat better opposition at Light Heavyweight and Heavyweight than Roy Jones? Likewise, Spinks was brutalized by Tyson, as opposed to the Johnson and Tarver variety of fighter. As I say, both great fighters...Spinks clearly the more accomplished though in my judgment.

 

Tyson should be nowhere near the top 50 let alone top 30. The man didn't beat one great prime fighter in his entire career, and was burnt out after 5 years of dominance. Get real. As for Jones, if he's top 30, then Spinks is top 20.

...Jones ain't top 30.

 

7 fighters out of 100 started their career post 1980...which was probably the year Bert Sugar started wearing diapers and going to bed around 6pm.

The man is clearly biased toward older fighters...moreso than anyone else out there. That list is a ****ing joke.

 

I see no reason to have Jones above Spinks, care to make a case?

Michael Spinks should be in the top 40 in my judgment. Jesus, I don't mind were he is as long as he's on the list but the incompetent or forgetful Bert Sugar couldn't even manage that. Ricardo Lopez at 53 and then not including Spinks, Barrera, and Morales is insulting. Lopez doesn't have the names on his record, and he missed his opportunity to move up in weight and establish his greatness by fighting Carbajal or Gonzalez.

 

Hopkins, Toney, Hill, Mccallum, Griffin, Paz, Sosa, Johnson, Gonzales, Ruiz, Tarver, Lacy, etc...

Add in MW, SMW, LHW and HW championships...plus his amazing reign at LHW (with the sheer amount of titles and defenses combined)...and your right, as great as Spinks was, he was not greater than Jones.

:good

 

A case can be made for both fighters, just depends on what you look for.... I have never tried to make my own ATG list because the more I study great fighters the harder I find it to have an opinion on who was greater.

 

You mean after reviewing Boxrec. Take up golf.

Jones - Toney, Hopkins, Tarver, Hill, Ruiz
Spinks - Holmes x2, Qawi, Mustafa, Johnson, Lopez, Cooney

Am I missing anyone? McCullum was beyond shot, Trinidad was past prime and wayyy above his weight limitations, and Tarver avenged his defeat twice, once by brutal knockout. Spinks unified the IBF, WBA, and WBC belts by beating everyone there was to beat in a very competitive Light Heavyweight division, and then went up to Heavy beating undefeated Holmes in his first fight there. Ruiz doesn't quite stack up.

 

Hopkins being a 23 fight novice, McCullum only having one more fight after being beaten (shot), Hill coming off a defeat, Pazienza being a blown up Lightweight, Ruiz not being a patch on Holmes, Tarver avenging his defeat by brutal knockout, Lacy being shot to peices, being whipped decisively by both Calzaghe and Taylor prior to fighting Jones. If you're going to list Sosa and Gonzales, I may as well list Sutherland and Eddie Davis.

Boxrec does not tell the whole story, Sues. Championships dont mean ****, it's the opposition you beat that has the more credibility. Same applies for title defences. Spinks was far greater than Jones, at both LH and HW.

 

why?

 

Doesn't work like that Riko. Holmes would go on to beat a prime Ray Mercer years after being defeated by Spinks, plus Michael was severely undersized against Holmes (A heavyweight...McCullum not a Heavyweight), in addition to being 30 years of age himself, and past his best.

I'm not biased, Spinks did beat better opposition at Light Heavyweight and Heavyweight.

Hopkins being green, Tarver never beating anyone of significance other than Jones, Hill coming off a defeat.

Woods, Ruiz, Sosa, Malinga is just plain desperate on your part.

[/QUOTE]

Cooney and Holmes both significantly bigger than Michael Spinks, Holmes undefeated and would fight on after Spinks and beat Ray Mercer, and remaining competitive with Evander Holyfield. Years after.

Marvin Johnson, Lopez, and Sutherland all beind beaten before Spinks 20th Professional bout. :good

People think Boxrec can give you all the answers these days.

 

Not at all, you looked on Boxrec and that's how you came to that conclusion. You lose credibility because instead of actually knowing anything about Spinks career you just go by what the website says. If we did that, Trindiad, McCullum, and Lacy would be credible wins but of course, we're all smarter than that. Also, comparing the McCullum episode to the Holmes victory is laughable. Was McCullum significantly bigger than Jones, and did he actually go on to win another professional fight...ever? Both answers being negative. He was finished.

 

First, I think my time here more than proves I am more than just a boxrec warrior. To even bring that **** up in a post with me is insulting...

Now, we can do the breaking down all day...

You say Lacy and Tito were shot...yet ignore that Roy himself was FAR past it as well. The Tarver win and subsequent losses fall into this category as well.

You say that moving up and beating Ruiz isnt as impressive as Spinks beating Holmes...yet ignore that Jones is a former MW champion who later became HW champion. Is it as impressive as Spinks over Holmes...probably not, but to just drop it by the wayside is ridiculous.

You say Hopkins was 23 fights in, but ignore that Roy himself was 21 fights in.

And though I agree with you on Spinks being the better HW, seeing as how Jones was there for 1 fight...I disagree with the dismissal of his title defenses and titles held.

Can you tell me how many fighters have won major titles in the MW, SMW, LHW and HW divisions? Try boxrec maybe...

And next time, try to find out if the guy your debating with knows what the **** he is talking about before you pull that boxrec bull**** again!

Thanks...

:hi: