I generally agree with a lot of your posts. But, are you suggesting that Yuri Vaulin (a guy with less than 20 fights total, a low KO percentage, and ZERO wins of any significance) is a better heavyweight than Michael Spinks? A man who ended the undefeated run of ATG Larry Holmes???? Larry may have been slowing down at that point, and, I think Larry squeaked out the second fight, but, both fights were definitely competitive. More competitive than undefeated Gold medal winner Ray Mercer was against Larry YEARS later. And, Vaulin wasn't a Heavyweight either. He was a Cruiserweight with limited power. He was handled with ease by King Arthur Williams, and never fought again. And, for the record, I remember the fight between Morrison and Vaulin. I watched it live. And, Morrison had his hands full with Vaulin until Yuri quit on his feet from a body shot mid rounds.
Morrison is a dangerous fight but Spinks should be favored here, more skilled boxer, better accolades.
Spinks wins this. The problem here is most people only remember Spinks getting obliterated by a prime young focused Tyson. Prior to that Spinks was the first reigning light heavyweight champion to challenge and defeat the reigning heavyweight champion. Larry Holmes no less. Something past greats Billy Conn, Archie Moore, and Bob Foster all failed to do. Spinks the fighter was complete and could do it all. At 6' 2" Spinks was one of the biggest light heavyweight Champions in history. His fighting style is best described as being a boxer-puncher. He was a tremendous two handed puncher who could box and dictate with his jab and knew how to utilize his height and reach versus taller and shorter opponents with unorthodox angles. As he was forced to do in his Light Heavyweight unification bout with 5' 7" WBC Champ Dwight Muhammad Qawi, and against the 6' 6" hard hitting Gerry Cooney. History should show that he was never off his feet prior and it took one of boxing’s hardest, fastest hitters ever to accomplish that knockdown and stoppage. However Tyson was his last fight because Spinks knees were shot, you can see a knee brace being worn for the Cooney fight. In the last 16 fights of his career were all title fights in which he went 15-1, 11-0 at light heavyweight and 4-1 at heavyweight. Morrison was too inconsistent, like to party and would get caught by awkward angles and hurt while trying to blast Spinks out early.
Fight boils down to the condition of the Spinks legs. They sure were deteriorating. He'd need them early against this guy. W/O top notch legs it is going to be very difficult for Mike to kill time and get the bout in the late rounds. Other thing would be if he can absorb body shots from a guy like Morrison.
Tommy not only had power but also speed. Very quick hands. Before 5 rounds Tommy. After 5 rounds Spinks.
Tommy Morrison is all wrong for Michael Spinks. Too much hand speed on such a big guy, Morrison landed hard punches on nearly everyone he fought including Ray Mercer. I think he would get to the target too much and Spinks liked to open up. Tommy could use his quick power boxing style to open up combinations and win via decision or stoppage. If lazy/defensively liable Morrison comes out, he could get cracked and stopped for sure. I am assuming the best Morrison.
Nothing more fun than watching a flawed fighter with game ending punching power. If nothing else, Morrison was that. But he was to inconsistent for a true professional like Spinks. Mike weathers the early storm and stops Tommy mid rounds. Never a dull moment with Morrison in the ring though.