"Ali-Spinks 2" from New Orleans.

from an interview i read spinks has it in his mind that fight number 2 was a con job by the networks and howard cosell to make ali seem like he did better then he really did
no bull**** guy thinks he won the fight

 

Ali was worse in the second fight physically ... Spinks went off the deep end with partying and a lack of focus ... Ali was mentally prepared to fight a smarter fight .. skill wise he had less than the previous February .. it was a dull fight aside from the historical significance ...

 

I loved the second fight and yes Ali was very past it but he gave a great showing in it. He toke Spinks lightly the first time and thought he would tire but he didn't but I think that focused Spinks would've beaten Ali anyways. I saw the second fight for the first time not too long ago and will rewatch the first fight soon.

 

I'd heard Neon Leon spent all the time between fights partying, drinking and introducing various granular substances to his nasal passages.

 

You said it all best Mr Bill! I can't recall off hand who Leon's main trainer was,,,,darn, on the tip of my tongue $#$@ Anyways it wasn't Leon's condition in the second go that caused him to lose but the chaos of too many experts in camp and in his corner according to him. This trainer whos name escapes me,,,,had total control for the first bout but said it was so bad in Leons corner in the second that he left knowing Spinks could not do what all the voices were yelling at him and it was the same every day in training. The consise movements and punches Leon repeated hundreds of times for the first bout were replaced with him basically untrained for the second,,,what was his trainers name? I think he was a former top ten middle,,,,Ali didn't have anything left here either, as you said what he had was spent in the Shavers bout for good. I was glad he won but he looked like a grampa doing it.

 

george benton?

 

Thats it!! Thanks pal, now I won't stay up tonight trying to remember it.

 

I agree with you Mr. Bill. The fights weren't exciting action-wise but they were noteworthy because of their historical significance (From a Boxing perspective). This is a similar scenario to the Ali/Foreman fight. The Rumble in The Jungle wasn't much of a fight as far as back and forth give and take non stop action is concerned but it was significant because Ali won the title back from an opponent he wasn't supposed to beat. It wasn't how Ali won but rather that he won that gave the fight meaning. For the 2nd Spinks fight it was Leon's to lose and he did. Ali wasn't that much better than he was in the 1st fight but Leon was worse. Leon should've won that fight but the stars weren't aligned in his favor. He should've rolled over an Ali who couldn't crack an eggshell at that point but his head wasn't screwed on right. Oh well.

 

Fight 2 was a borefest. Ali looked good dancing and holding, but he didn't do much actual fighting. And Spinks just went through the motions. Holmes would have tore through both of those guys that night, as would Norton.

 

At the time,I was overjoyed that Ali had won the titleback,but it was n't a very good fight at all. What gets me is that so many people say that Spinks would have won if he'd fought like he did in their first fight. The New Orleans bout would have been closer than it was,but thankfully Ali still had enough left to beat any version of Spinks.

 

Steve, ya may be right but we didn't see Ali have anything much left at all in this bout. He really looked like a grampa version of himself and had Leon been able to be prepared as he was for the first go I believe it would have had a closer but similar result.

 

When did ali actually do any fighting? all he did was go backwards and hold flick the odd jab the fraud.

 

I reckon Ali would have won by something like a 9 - 6 or 8 - 6 - 1 margin. You're right when you say that Muhammad looked like a grampa version of himself,though. Like a lot of people,I wish that he'd packed it in after 1975.