Did Michael Spinks hit harder than any middleweight in history?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mark ant, Aug 15, 2021.


  1. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    I don`t think Jackson could have knocked out light heaviers, he was too small and couldn`t stop Thomas Tate at 160.
     
  2. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Yes Mugabi actually looked bigger than Hagler when they fought.
     
  3. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,132
    25,315
    Jan 3, 2007
    I think he could have potentially stopped some of the less durable ones. A 160 lb man with a big punch could definitely KO a 175 lb man. The bigger problem comes with TAKING it in return
     
    mark ant likes this.
  4. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    60,719
    81,016
    Aug 21, 2012
    It's really hard to say but I wouldn't be surprised if he did. He was a big puncher in his own, heavier division.
     
    mark ant likes this.
  5. Rope-a-Dope

    Rope-a-Dope Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,138
    7,974
    Jan 20, 2015
    Spinks is a top 5 hardest puncher at 175, no one at 160 could move up and hit that hard.
     
  6. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,853
    44,559
    Apr 27, 2005
    Exactly. Many still don't realise.
     
  7. Cecil

    Cecil Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,102
    5,225
    Mar 22, 2015
    It depends what we class him as but the only one who could be comparable and even arguably hit harder is Bob Fitzsimmons he had freakish power.
    Bob was probably in reality a super middleweight though.
     
  8. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,433
    9,421
    Jul 15, 2008
    He didn't hit harder than Langford ..
     
    louis54 likes this.
  9. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,433
    9,421
    Jul 15, 2008
    Of course Spinks was a big puncher but not so sure top five so fast .. out of the gate

    Foster
    Charles
    Moore
    Moorer
    Mustafa Muhammad
    Langford
    Satterfield
    Carpentier

    Haven't even dug in .. Spinks again was a huge puncher and an excellent light heavyweight ..
     
    louis54 likes this.
  10. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    okay.
     
  11. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,853
    44,559
    Apr 27, 2005
    Well there is a lot of punchers over 10 decades or more but he's as good a chance as anyone not named Foster for mine.

    He's absolutely ahead of Charles who had very good power but was no one punch guy.

    I'd take him over Archie too personally.

    Moorer is in the race but his body of work IMO doesn't stamp him above Spinks. He's got far less to go on tho he obviously hit like a ton of bricks.

    Eddie's right there for sure but Spinks probably has more concussive one punch proof on his ledger.

    Satterfield's in the race for pure power HG, absolutely.

    Langford and Carpentier, well i like to "see" what i am judging first and foremost. I don't believe Carpentier would have matched him personally and Langford who would know.

    There's a lot out there but for me Spinks is a great choice for top 5.

    Picture this - Murray Sutherland who faced Spinks twice and Saad once when asked who hit harder said "he (Spinks) was way ahead of Saad". Now we know Saad is a BIG puncher so how hard does Spinks hit!
     
  12. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,433
    9,421
    Jul 15, 2008
    Moorer hit much harder at heavyweight.
    Langford is no comparison
    Saterfield is no comparison
    Foster is tops
    Charles flattened heavyweights.
    Mustafa was a better right handed puncher. Not the hook. A wash.
    I see nothing to say he hit harder than the att time KO king who floored and actually hurt Marciano.

    All said, no doubt Spinks was a great great fighter.
     
  13. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,853
    44,559
    Apr 27, 2005
    What happened at heavyweight has zilch to do with who hits hardest at 175 tho HG. You placed a high emphasis on that with both Moorer and Charles and deduct from Spinks yet you have Foster, who struggled power wise far more than Spinks (and Charles, and Moore, and Satterfield etc etc) at heavyweight as the top puncher at 175.

    Personally i wouldn't label any light heavyweight in history as a "no comparison" to Spinks in the power stakes.

    Huge fan of Mustafa whose power is extremely underrated but the Spinks "Jinx", which was his greatest punch might not be surpassed as a single punch at 175. Mustafa didn't hit harder with the right. Marvin Johnson, who faced both, says Spinks is the hardest puncher he ever faced.

    Yaqui Lopez, who fought his share of punchers said this of Spinks - BEST PUNCHER
    Spinks: He’s an awkward puncher, he hit me on the temple and I went down. The referee counted, I didn’t hear, one, or two, or three, or four, you hear five and it felt very far away, six, seven. I thought time to get up, I looked at my corner and they tell me ‘eight, get up’. He knocked me down three times, he’s a puncher.

    There's a lot of testimony out there for Spinks as a puncher. He's a bomber.

    Charles trainer, the great Ray Arcel himself said Charles wasn't a top line puncher.

    Of course it's mostly speculation who would make a top 5 but always fun to ponder.
     
  14. Entaowed

    Entaowed Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,837
    4,174
    Dec 16, 2012
    It is an extremely rare medical condition to feel no pain, & I know no boxer who had this.
    High pain tolerance yes. But put them into say a fire or boiling water or other torture they deal with it like most everyone else.
    Everyone who ever lived can be knocked down.
    All those who rarely or never were would be if they fought larger men who could fight.
    Even the best HWs, nobody could take endless unprotected blows.