Michael Spinks V James J Jeffries?

Tangstad record is very inflated?
Munroe's and Finnegan's are not I suppose?
It's a damnsight better than Munroe's and Finnegan's combined!
Tangstad was European Champion at the time of the fight.
Cooney was out of the ring a year and rusty ?
Fitzsimmons was out of the ring 2 years and was 37 .
Corbett 1 1/2 years and 33.And he hadn't won a fight in 6 years!
HYPOCRISY!!!!

 

The problem is that Spink's heavyweight record is two wins over an ageing Holmes, one of which he should probably have lost.

This makes him a more credible challenger for Jeffries than Jones say, but you are still picking a guy with a couple of good fights at heavyweight, over a dominant champion from yesteryear.

That is quite a big step to take.

 

Yes,especially when you are facing men as big or bigger than yourself who know how to box.

 

Thank goodness your stupidity is confined to mostly this part of ESB.,

Are you comparing Fitz and Corbett to a shot Jerry Cooney? Nice one.

Spinks did little as champion, he did not deserve to beat Holmes in the re-match. No one remembers who Tangstad was, except for maybe the Scandinavian based boxing fans. I've been here for over 10 years, his name has not come up and as I told you he was Ko'd the year before Spinkis picked him

Those where his IBF title defenses. Then he beat a washed-up an on the bottle on the bottle Jerry Cooney. Tyson ended him in 91 seconds.

Jeffries competition was very good in title defenses. He fought Fitz, Corbett and Sharey, each of whom were top three type of opponents at the time and a solid Ruhlin. Munroe at the time was viewed as a contender. Finnegan didn't belong, and as I pointed out, he lasted 55 seconds. Munroe was mainly done in one round as well.

And more agenda stuff, and bad comparisons, Mcvey?

 

People take you more seriously when you know how to spell a fighter's name correctly.

And calling Gerry Cooney shot while propping up the value of Corbett is the height of hypocrisy.

 

What's your point?

 

I am not sure that Cooney was fit to be in the ring quite frankly!

 

Spinks on points. Too much speed

 

Do you think he was anymore unfit than a 39years old Fitzsimmons who had not fought for 2 years?

 

The Boilermaker was tough as teak, extremely well conditioned, iron willed and it appears to have a almost granite chin, was also considered a "Big" guy in his days, today , he would be considered average at best for a heavy.

Now the bad, slow of foot, easy to hit, beyond easy actually, had usually a distinct weight and height advantage, was not a mover or a fluid jabber, not even a jab and grabber like Johnson, for the majority of his signature fights he wore his opponents out while they teed off on him with every punch in the book until the above referenced attributes bailed him out over 20 or 25 rounds.

In this instance we are talking 15 rounds to get the job done......not happening.

Michael Spinks was a undefeated World Class operator who went up to Heavy and defeated a slightly faded but still formidable Larry Holmes twice and defused the still very dangerous Cooney decisively..... that alone is leaps and bounds above Jeffries has EVER accomplished.

Jeffries has no reach or weight or height advantage.......he has never ever fought a skilled Heavy like Spinks EVER, he would get lit up by every punch in the book, the jab alone would make him see double, he could never close the distance or adjust to Spinks herky jerky style and while Spinks was not a lights out puncher he was accurate and sharp and those punches hurt the most.

Conclusion: Straight out of a time machine, one sided beat down by Spinks with Jeffries not winning one round, his chin most likely carries him thru until the Ref stops it because he is bleeding out of every orifice with both eyes solid shut.

Now . Jeffries born in the 50's or 60's , yeah , with modern training and competition he would be a handful for everybody and for sure picks up a belt, but the stone age version is severely out classed.

Now back to Spinks,

Spinks beat Holmes who was not much removed of his form when he beat Witherspoon and here Spoon is handled like a would be could be fighter despite he lost against Holmes........I personally rate Witherspoon not highly but in this forum he is some demi god who evil forces ruined him...

The same fools rate Foreman's KO win over a truly shot to shid Cooney as the second coming and this "Monster" Foreman would defeat a Prime Tyson because of it.........pathetic.........that version of Cooney was done.....the Spinks version had still some serious life in him. Fact.

Now back to Holmes, the Spinks detractors claim that Holmes was old and finished when he beat him, yes he was declining but still was a top operator as witnessed after the Tyson blow out, he beat top contender Mercer and gave Holyfield and Mc Call all they could handle. ...never KO'ed again......in contrast when Jeffries came out of retirement he was beat from pillar to post by Johnson.

Now to Spinks being scared facing Tyson, I call BS....he talked to the crowd coming in, talked to people Ringside when he entered , talked to the crowd close to Ringside........he always looked the same when he fought, absolute folklore that he was scared shidless......he wanted to weather the storm and take Tyson deep and did not lay down he just got laid out....

Now , to just start another Hornets nest, over 15 rounds Spinks beats the breaks of Johnson too, throwing 5 punches a round aint gonna do it for Johnson, Spinks is too skilled to be jab and grabbed or mauled up close and he will be befuddled by the movement and accuracy of Spinks while absolutely respecting Spinks punching power.......plus he would never go seek and destroy like Tyson so he looses a wide UD fighting negatively.

BTW, the Spinks conqueror Mike Gerald Tyson would decapitate Johnson and Jeffries with out much fuss, absolute demolition job.

 

Yeah but Holmes, even at that point, was likely better than a lot of prime fighters of the late 19th century, early 20th century. One could make the case that Spinks would've been a dominant champion then, too.

 

Of course he would.....If you made a list of top contenders from the year 1890-1970 and just picked random names from the list, odds are, prime Tyson would've stopped them as quick as he did Spinks.

 

Yes absolutely.

I presume that I don't need to expand upon his problems outside the ring?