Bob Fitzsimmons vs Michael Spinks @ 175

I dont know which way to go here honestly. I saw Spinks from the beginning and have read 3 different books on Fitz. Not sure Spinks is the harder puncher here Bob was stopping people on a regular basis with body shots and I dont mean liver shots. He also scored alot of KO's from punches to the side of the neck!! but yes I do realize the mitts were smaller. Guys for now I'm stummped.

 

Spinks one sided class beating. You can't compare a boxer from jurassic park with with spinks

 

I think that that guy misunderstood you

 

Dinosaurs would dominate modern predators, I'm not sure if this is good analogy.

 

Lol. I'm sure evolution will prevail, just like a pack of killer whales would annihilate a megalodon

 

Evolution is not progression.

 

Oh yes in boxing it is.

 

Except for some obvious greats like Holy Chavez ect. Boxing has regressed since the late 80's IMO

 

Simple counter point - high guard with small gloves is useless for most of the time. It's not progression, it's adaptation to ruleset.

 

I see the 80s as modern boxing, there is not a great change since then in skill terms in boxing overall

 

It is not truth at all. A high guard is always better even fighting under bare knuckle rules

 

No problem, I was just confused with your reply!

 

Bare knuckle is different than fighting with small gloves. I don't know much about it, but it's not a coincidence that fighters started using high guard when fights became shorter and they started using bigger gloves.
Try to fight against Fitzsimmons with modern style and he'd knock you out quickly. Your guard would not be effective and he'd kill your arms and body.

 

Judging on quickly Spinks folded vs Tyson, Spinks would need to avoid those body shot and head shots that Fitz delivered with parlaying power. I like Fitz here to win, behind on points.