I've seen a lot of people pick Foster over Spinks at LHW.. is he still as effective against Spinks at a weight where Michael had more success? And just for shits and giggles.. Spinks vs Moorer at HW Foster vs Moorer at HW
Spinks was a high level light heavyweight. I wish Marvin Hagler would have come up and fought Spinks since Marvin always wanted the smaller guys like Hearns,Duran,Leonard and Benitez to fight him. So that would have been interesting seeing Marvin taste the Spinks Jinx. Michael was 6-2 1/2 so that would have been a tough fight for Marvin, although Michael's reach was 76 inches. Hearns had a longer reach at 78. Hard fight to pick with Foster and Spinks. I would have to go with Spinks. He moved up and was successful at heavyweight and Foster was not. Decision for Spinks.
Spinks over Foster at 205 lbs by UD 15 in a close one (8-5-2). Foster over Spinks at 175 lbs by SD 15 in a razor thin decision. Might sound crazy but I feel thats how it would turn out, both men were excellent at 175 pounds, but Spinks more so at 200+.
Foster was not a good Heavyweight, he just didn't fare well at the weight at all for whatever reason despite being a brilliant Light Heavy. Spinks by KO at Heavyweight IMO, though at LHW it's pretty much a pick 'em, slight edge to Foster I'd say. At HW, Moorer probably KO's Foster, though I'd take the Spinks that beat Holmes in their first fight over Moorer by Decision. Both KO Moorer at LHW though.
At 175, Foster has a good shot at beating Spinks.... At 200 pounds, Spinks tears Foster a new *******.... MR.BILL
I started typing a post but after reading yours thats exactly what I was going to type.. So...what Pea said.
