The better win: Spinks over Holmes I or Duran over Barkley?

for me duran's

 

What Michael did was more historic, but he had some help from a diminished Holmes. An overconfident Larry lost it as much as Mike won.

Barkley fought a terrific fight against Duran, having all the self assurrance which came from blasting Hearns out. The Blade gave El Cholo a formidable roadblock to conquer. To me, that makes this the better win.

 

Duran all day 24/7...365...infinity, he beat the man who flattened the man who flattened him & at 37 years of age. 1st Lightweight champ to win the 160 title.

 

Regardless of how Larry Holmes CHOSE to show up, he was more likely than not viewed as a more formidable opponent for Spinks than Barkley was to Duran.. Some people thought that Holmes giving Spinks a title shot was so comical that they whimsically asked him if he was going to fight Marvin Hagler next. Barkley was certainly no slouch as he had recently KO'd the Hitman who had previously made minced meat out of Duran, but he was not exactly an undefeated legend either, and nor was Duran in his very FIRST fight at the weight limit that they were competing at..... Lastly, Spinks made history by becoming the first in his category to win a title at that weight, and furthermore, duplicated the feat 8 months later, albeit a highly contested decision.....

I vote for Spinks has having the better win...

 

Barkley is as good as Holmes? People are dillusional for Duran. Barkley sucked. Holmes was undefeated!!! Barkley had 6 losses. Are you guys really boxing fans who vote in these polls???? The overrating of Duran confirmed!!!!!!

 

People might be surprised to hear me say Duran vs Barkley but I'm going too. Spinks beat a better fighter than Barkley, but he was still relatively close to his prime himself. The reason I pick Duran vs Barkley is because of how shopworn Duran obviously was, and yet he was still able to do so many different things to Barkley. He counterpunched him superbly, when he lead he dished out damage to a Middleweight who looked like a Light Heavyweight, he hurt him several times during teh contest and finished extremely strongly. I thought Spinks/Holmes was more debatable than Duran/Barkley.

Spinks vs Holmes was a wonderful achievement, Duran vs Barkley is the single greatest past prime performance I have ever seen and one of the best performances I've seen, period. A guy excelled as a Lightweight 15 years earlier, and not in the vein that Manny excelled as a Super Bantamweight, this guy had 60-70 fights at 135lbs, and now he's here as a Middleweight displaying his skills. It's pretty much unheard of, only a handful of fighters can pull that off. Duran wasn't a safety first fighter, he wasn't furthering his longevity by getting in the ring with Leonard twice, Hearns, and Hagler, but he defied the odds regardless.

 

It's Michael Spinks over Larry Holmes by a mile.

 

I think so also.

 

Spinks has the edge

 

I agree, it's not even close. Spinks stepped up as much in weight and fought an undefeated champion with the 2nd most amount of title defenses and rated in the top5 of most people's all-time heavyweight lists.

Barkley, by comparison, is a decent titleholder whose accomplishments are nothing close to Holmes'.

 

Me too. An old Duran beat a prime young fighter in Iran Barkely. Spinks beat a great,but faded one in Larry Holmes.

 

A pleasant surprise.

Duran-Barkley was a war. And lest we forget, Barkley was not only younger, in his prime, and fighting better than he ever did before or after, he did everything right. He made it a war of attrition with a vicious pace -which exactly what you want to do against a 37 year old man not known for good conditioning. He ripped the body -consistently throughout the bout. Duran took it. His left hook was on fire -which was a Duran foil even in the 70s.

And that left hook nailed him.

Duran survived, though I still don't understand how he took that shot. Barkley wound that up, got perfect leverage with legs bent, found the angle, and Duran did not see it... I still can't get over that.

Then Duran turns around and puts Iran down in the 11th round. That's serious stuff. Spinks had an impressive, historical win, but it just doesn't match what Duran managed to do to the conqueror of his conqueror.

 

I am not sure how you can say Spinks moving up 30 pounds and beating an undefeated champion does not match Duran beating a guy who had no title defenses and 5 or 6 losses. This is what I mean about Duran being overrated. Duran's losses to Hearns and Benitez 5-7 years before the Barkley fight are completely ignored and excused.