Was Holmes-Spinks 2 a robbery?

i think holmes himself would say he is chronically unlucky

 

Oh No - Not again.

 

Some times you get the benefit of the doubt and some times you don't.

 

Yes it was.

It was a case of close but clear for Holmes. The rounds seemed to me to be pretty decisive both ways. Not to mention Holmes was able to hurt Spinks.

 

What if the judges go drinking before the Fight? Maybe they drink a little too much? Then Larry Holmes puts them on blast and tells everyone these guys get smashed. Naturally their not gonna want Larry around.

 

I thought Holmes won, but it was far from the worst decision I've seen. Maybe it's just a sign of being a little jaded after seeing so many such decisions over the years but you do reach a point where one like this engenders little more than a shrug and a "well, tough **** for the other guy."

 

Yes it was a robbery. But if it would have been Ali you know he would have gotten the decision.. Larry was robbed just like Norton was and Young

 

Larry boo-boo'd with the comments about the judges being drunk and Marciano's jock strap fitness. He knew that.

I've never had Holmes winning that fight with under a three point lead, and I've watched that fight dozens of times (saw it live and was profoundly disgusted). Holmes was the aggressor and the only one who got hurt during the fight at all was Spinks.

 

I've scored it for both over the years

 

I don't think it's an outright robbery no, I also had Holmes winning by 3 rounds. But it was close enough where Spinks could of edged it, Holmes had a strong start but Spinks got back into it in the 2nd half of the fight.

Controversial decision which Holmes probably deserved to edge ? Yes. But an absolute robbery ? No I don't think so.

 

Too close to be called a robbery imo.

 

Close but I give it to Larry., Age was the enemy here too.