Could Michael Spinks accomplish what Moorer did at heavyweight?

Yes, he could. And, he would have beaten the version of Foreman that flattened Moorer. Unlike Moorer, Spinks could remain disciplined the entire fight.

 

No chance IMO. Unlike Moorer, Spinks could garner no respect from Foreman.

 

Michael Spinkd victory over Holmes (1st fight) he caught lightning in a bottle.
He caught Holmes , an aging ATG , who didn't take the fight as serious as he should've, didnt train properly, and also didn't have the firepower to seriously hurt Spinks as the fight got into the later rds.
So Spinks outmanuevered Holmes and won a disputed dec.
2nd fight most thought Holmes won including me.
The rest of Spinks victories at heavyweight were perfectly made match making.
Until the multi million dollar fight against Tyson, which in my opinion is a much truer indication of what would've happened to Spinks at heavyweight against the best available.
Spinks like Bob Foster before him wasn't a good heavyweight. He didn't have the frame to carry the extra weight and be great. He had the technical ability to win against 2nd and 3rd rate heavyweights ( Like Foster did)
But against the best heavyweights he'd get the same treatment as Tyson gave him....
Just not as quickly lol.

 

Moorer is better than Spinks at HW H2H IMO by quite a bit. In terms of HW feats yes. Moorer started 17-1 with 6 victories over contenders.and Spinks was 4-1 with 4. I don't see a reason Spinks couldn't win another 13 in a row with 2 elite opponents? They have the same number of HW title wins.

In terms of Moorers specific opponents Moorer came back from being knocked down 3 times to win and I have no faith in Spinks ability to do the same. Before the Foreman KO Moorer was doing better against Foreman than Holyfield and if he'd somehow gotten up he would have been up 3 points with 2 rounds to go and likely wins.

Moorer was up 2-0 in the Holyfield rematch and took 5 knockdowns for Holyfield to put down in what was honestly the best power showing of Holyfields HW career.

 

Beyond any doubt, Michael Spinks was a clean athlete, not someone who used steroids or any other PEDs. Even from 170 for David Sears to 212 for Tyson and into retirement, his physique remained essentially the same.

I can't respect Moorer, Holyfield, Haye and others who successfully moved up in weight in the same context.


So far as beating Michael at HW is concerned, one needed to do exactly as Tyson did. Tua would wipe him out in similar fashion. The Jinx was akin to other slow starting power punchers like Palomino.

With Foreman, he was certainly capable of applying the Tommy Morrison template. Let Michael get warmed up however, one would have a problem, and at 212, Michael had the necessary heft, height, reach, mobility and intelligence to outbox an awful lot of heavyweights. Larry Holmes, as experienced as he was by the end of his career, has said that Michael came at him from angles the Assassin had never seen before or since. The Jinx was an incredibly awkward guy to deal with. Peak Tyson did what he did best, get Michael out of there ASAP.

 

Don't think so, I know Spinks was an awkward so and so but I don't see him taking Holyfield for starters.

 

Yes. Michael Spinks could beat everyone Michael Moorer beat at heavyweight (and light heavyweight).

And Michael Moorer didn't derail George Foreman's ambitions, so whether Spinks could beat Foreman doesn't matter.

That said, Spinks beat an active, 35-year-old Larry Holmes, who was unbeaten in 48 straight fights. So I think he could avoid the right hand of an inactive 45-year-old George Foreman, who hadn't fought in a year and a half and was coming off a loss to Tommy Morrison (who did a bad Michael Spinks impression to outpoint Foreman).

 

Spinks had only five total fights at heavyweight. Two against the aging Holmes one against at the time a part time fighter , full time substance abusing Cooney , and something named Tangstad, and was completely blown away by Tyson, being one of his fastest ko victims.
What makes you so sure he beats any top ten aggressive natural heavyweight at the top of his game?
Say what one will about Moorer.
But he did beat a few live bodies at heavyweight.
That's more than can be said for Spinks.

 

Bowe 1 Holy would have been all over him, Spinks would have been overwhelmed imo. Holmes against Spinks nowhere near the level of prime Holy... either time.

But that's just how I see it.

 

I believe the Holyfield that beat old George would put a prolonged beating on the Spinks that fought Tyson. I can't see Spinks winning, at all! No offense to Spinks, for sure.

 

Befuddled is a strong word for that mildly competitive display…aided by an elbow, no less.

 

? why is he in Marciano's spot, how odd. He should be competing with Foreman for 4th (btw he isn't fraudulent obviously)