Could any fighter in history the size of Michael Spinks have stood a chance v a prime M.Tyson?

We didnt burn him Mark!

 

Not sure how lean Spinks was? In all photos he looked pretty lean to me.
HWs do not have to be as lean, nor generally benefit from being very low body fat, but Spinks even after he bulked up never seemed at all overweight.

Sometimes guys we compare do not trim down nor need to.
Although yes that is more common than bulking up.
I agree that we do not know how good he would have been against TOP TIER modern sized HWs.
Those you cited sometimes were sometimes somewhat more than 218, but let us stipulate they were fighters say roughly that weight--->if lean.

Edit: I think Spinks added muscle was functional-or at least not harmful, likely at least some benefit, except that it did not give him the amount of benefit-power + punch resistance-that all other things being equal, he would have if (basically acquired through more usual boxing specific training) if he was naturally that sized.

My point you did not contest stands, he was small framed for a modern HW.
He did fairly intense modern weigh lifting to reach both 202 against Holmes, & 212.5 against Tyson.
Unlike Holyfield though, no evidence of using illegal PEDs.

 

Definition is correlated with body fat level.
But it is imperfect, some people with low BF have litte definition.
I have ~ a 40" waist, & even when it was about 42", I have had at least a faint, asymmetrical 4 pack.
Whether due to being a sit up champ when young & thin, or my distribution of visceral vs. subcutaneous fat (likely both)...

Some folks just do not show definition proportionate to the usual amount at their FB levels.
Some people are just smoother.
Show some pictures of Spinks. Even at his heaviest. Does he ever look like he is remotely overweight?

 

The thing is we know Spinks made 175 easily for 8 years. In his first 10 title fights he came in under 174. He went straight from 175 to 200 in 3 months flat to fight Holmes. He did it right but we know he's added a lot of artificial weight but his height and frame allowed him to still look quite good carrying it. Shilstone did a terrific job tho.

 

I agree completely. It was a case where although I have zero reason to ascribe it in part to PEDs, he did gain quality muscle at an unusual rate for someone not already underweight, & you have given me food for thought-since he did not look at all bulky at a size right near Holyfield's, does he have a frame that is bigger than I thought?
Difference is Evander had less leg muscle & more on his torso.

Come to think of it, this may be a case where someone both could have the structure to get a respectable size at HW...Without looking like he had too much muscle...

...But just like as if he had a smaller structure, it just did not pay off in power.
Sometimes someone *cab* get a certain size & it looks natural...
But they just will not have near the same relative power as when somewhat lighter.