Was Michael Spinks no. 1 P4P after beating Holmes?

I think Hagler coming off the win against Hearns was the the #1 P4P in 1985 and held onto the spot until he lost to SRL in 1987

 

I wonder if Michael Spinks beat Jake Paul's

 

No he didn't beat JP

 

yep, and I think Curry was considered number 2 at that time.

 

No.

 

I can't emphasis enough that Holmes was NOT all that highly regarded at the time. The Holmes love is mostly retro-active from the 90s comeback. In the 80s, Holmes was regarded as a HUGE letdown from Ali. The destruction of zombie-Ali, the fighting Marvis instead of Page, the Tex Cobb fight...He was castigated for taking a belt from the gutter, giving the IBF instant credibility so that there was now a THIRD recognized ratings body, and for fighting the David Bey's of the world while the division had obviously moved on. Losing to a LHW and telling Peter Marciano that he was living off his dead brother endeared him to no one.

I know...50 guys are now going to come in and tell me that they loved him and I don't know what I am taking about. But it was true, and ironically, Holmes would be the first to complain that he did not get the respect that he deserved. I have personally heard him say so...and so have all of you, admit it or no.

So no. While it was regarded as a great accomplishment, it was never thought to have made him the best of the era.

 

This old thread has KO magazine pound for pound rankings

[url]https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/pound-for-pound-list-since-1980.486805/[/url]

I don't remember anyone else doing pound for pound rankings at that time.

 

A Julissa & Thaler's Boxing Quarterly issue of 1985 P4P rankings:

1. Michael Spinks
2. Marvin Hagler
3. Larry Holmes
4. Donald Curry
5. Thomas Hearns
6. Ricardo Leyva Muñoz Ramirez
7. Milton McCrory
8. Julio Cesar Chavez
8. Hector Camacho
10. Barry McGuigan

 

I thought it was Hagler, though Curry was pretty Elite at the time.

Btw, I was around during that time and most people were skeptical Spinks really beat Larry. Both times.

It wasn't a standout pfp moment at the time, especially considering the competition at the lighter weights.

Apologies if these points have already been made.

 

He didn't look like it. He caught an older Holmes at just the right time, is what it seemed like.

 

I'd have him as such. No one else had dominated his own division and then moved up and beat the top fighter in the division above.

 

I get that feeling too when talking to my dad who was born in the 1950's and great up with Ali. He hated Holmes outside of his performance vs Norton. He also said that George Foreman was not well liked in 70's either and that his persona and reputation is mostly off of his comeback and grill sales commercials

 

Tyson became the youngest heavyweight champion in history in 86 and was obliterating the division in 85 finishing the year 15-0 with 11 rd1 knockouts

Spinks and Holmes still get KO by Tyson in 85-86

 

You are absolutely right sir.
I'm old enough and young enough to remember it clearly.
He had what was thought of at the time a boring style, he was seen as a wanna be Ali, without the personality, he also avoided some of the better opponents of the era.
He choose to fight Carl Williams, David Bey, Marvin Frazier, Scott Frank, and even Tim Witherspoon. Not one of those boxers had more than twenty fights at the time he fought them.
And were generally seen as " safe" opponents.
He avoided the better contenders of the era, like Coetzee, Dokes, Page, P.Thomas.

Even Michael Spinks was seen as a sacrificial lamb when the fight was initially announced.
Holmes was a decent fighter , but with an ATG jab. without that jab he was average.
He does belong in a top ten of heavyweight greats.
But at the lower end....