Micheal Spinks vs Archie Moore

Spinks KO.

 

Spinks by UD, with a high possibility of Archie Moore getting some good hits in that might land a T/KO.

 

Much as I love Spinks, Moore takes this. He has a way of getting in underneath and applying a kind of pressure that Spinks is uncomfortable with.

 

Archie by KO. At there best I’m taking Archie. So much more proven. Think Archie confuses the heck out of him.

 

Much as I hate to pick against Archie, Spinks was a wonderful Boxer, quick, brave and hard punching at his very best. Archie would give him the absolute fight of his life and the middle rounds would be horrible for Mike but I think he nicks a close one, maybe all on the last when he sticks and runs.

 

How I see it also

 

I also think styles favour Spinks.Archie has the KO chance.safer bet is Spinks on points imo

 

Michael Spinks was a very accomplished World Light Heavyweight Champion, his record speaks for itself. He did win the IBF World Heavyweight Title on Sept 21 1985, thirty years to the date that Archie Moore failed to wrest the title from Rocky Marciano in 1955. Michael's victory over then IBF Champion Larry Holmes was brilliant, but he was fighting a legend that was physically in decline. Marciano appeared to have a few fights left in him when he fought Archie, but decided to retire undefeated in 1956. Skill and speed are on Spinks side, but experience wise, Moore has the edge. Michael wins the early rounds based on his awkward movement, bending to his opponents blows. But Archie with his cross armed defense deflects many of Spinks punches, especially the Spinks Jinx that has flattened many opponents. Moore begins to land with accuracy taking Michael's right hands as he did against Durelle in 1958. Archie Moore takes this bout by a split 15 round decision.

 

Spinks is at the one with the disadvantage here stylistically, IMO. I distinctly remember watching Eddie Davis fight Spinks and thinking he does a lot of things reminiscent of Archie Moore; his cross-arm guard up close, the way he twists with the jab to get a massive counter off, his snaky jab coming from below, and how he got under punches. Moore did all of this better than Davis. I can't imagine Moore not getting underneath Spinks' shots, sticking to him like glue and working in any areas he can. His body attack vs Maxim was horrid and the way he wove his cross-counters counters over the jab before putting something else on the end is great.

But Spinks would obviously take Moore a lot more seriously than he did Davis. And j can't see anyone who was KOed by Charles, Morrow and Bivins pressuring Spinks all night without getting KOed at some point over fifteen.

 

Archie by close unanimous decision. His experience would see him through.

 

There are great arguments on both sides here, and I'm kinda torn . But seeing how Moore was handled by Ezzard Charles ,I think Spinks was pretty close to Charles skill wise so I'd go with Spinks ,, not confidently.

 

Spinks by decision in a close tough fight.

 

Not bad reasoning but I don’t personally think that was the best Archie. He still wasn’t using his cross arm defense then. There’s very little 40s footage of Moore but what’s available he looked like a completely different fighter albeit a much faster one

 

Spinks late knock out.