Hearns vs Spinks

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by 80s champs, Jun 12, 2009.


Page 1 of 2
  1. 80s champs

    80s champs Active Member Full Member

    536
    71
    Nov 9, 2005
    Lets say hearns peak was at Lt heavyweight,(I'm talking talent here,not size). Hearns had more power than spinks because he was at his peak at this weight( a jr middleweight talent at lt heavyweuight). How would he have done with Spinks?
     
    80s champs, Jun 12, 2009
    80s champs, Jun 12, 2009
    #1
  2. Xplosive

    Xplosive Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,518
    10,396
    Jun 23, 2008
    Spinks wins regardless. Micheal had a very good chin, and very good stamina... Tommy did not.
     
    Xplosive, Jun 12, 2009
    Xplosive, Jun 12, 2009
    #2
  3. ironchamp

    ironchamp Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,365
    1,037
    Sep 5, 2004
    Spinks would probably stop him 3-5 rounds tops....

    Hearns lacked durability at LHW.

    Spinks had good power, a good chin and he was pretty big himself so I can't even picture a Hearns win.
     
    ironchamp, Jun 12, 2009
    ironchamp, Jun 12, 2009
    #3
  4. brownpimp88

    brownpimp88 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,378
    10
    Feb 26, 2007
    Heanrs can't beat Light heavies with power, he wont be able to handle it. Virgil Hill wasn't known as a knockout artist, once Hearns fights a big dude that can punch hard, he'll lose.
     
    brownpimp88, Jun 12, 2009
    brownpimp88, Jun 12, 2009
    #4
  5. KOTF

    KOTF Bingooo Full Member

    13,448
    29
    Jun 2, 2009
    Spinks hits him w/ the Spinks Jinx and he'll be down for the count
     
    KOTF, Jun 12, 2009
    KOTF, Jun 12, 2009
    #5
  6. Longhhorn71

    Longhhorn71 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,714
    3,475
    Jan 6, 2007
    Spinks has a right hand, left hook, and uppercut....all equal, if not greater, than Hearn's stuff.

    Spinks was at his best at Lt Hvy.
     
    Longhhorn71, Jun 12, 2009
    Longhhorn71, Jun 12, 2009
    #6
  7. riggers

    riggers Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,218
    3
    Aug 14, 2008
    Hearns was not at his best at light heavy, no matter what way you slice it.
     
    riggers, Jun 13, 2009
    riggers, Jun 13, 2009
    #7
  8. robert ungurean

    robert ungurean Богдан Philadelphia Full Member

    17,171
    16,945
    Jun 9, 2007
    Spinks by KO
     
    robert ungurean, Jun 13, 2009
    robert ungurean, Jun 13, 2009
    #8
  9. red cobra

    red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

    38,042
    7,584
    Jul 28, 2004
    Spinks was the more natural lightheavy of the two, and hence the stronger man. I don't think at any time would Hearns be a threat to Spinks. If they evr met, I believe Spink's jinx would have ended things by round 8.
     
    red cobra, Jun 13, 2009
    red cobra, Jun 13, 2009
    #9
  10. GDG

    GDG Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,663
    88
    Jun 2, 2009
    I don't think this is really fair on Hearns!!!! Nowhere near his best weight!!!
     
    GDG, Jun 13, 2009
    GDG, Jun 13, 2009
    #10
  11. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,854
    10,064
    Jul 15, 2008
    The only guy that always wins this sort of like kind argument is Marciano ... a prime Hearns was 154 to a prime Spinks 175, basically twenty pounds or the same as Rocky at 185 going against a 215 pound guy ... just like it's unfair to Hearns who beat a decent champ like Hill but who all agree would be flattened by Spinks ... point made !
     
    he grant, Jun 13, 2009
    he grant, Jun 13, 2009
    #11
  12. My dinner with Conteh

    My dinner with Conteh Tending Bepi Ros' grave again Full Member

    12,059
    3,581
    Dec 18, 2004
    Read the opening post.
     
    My dinner with Conteh, Jun 13, 2009
    My dinner with Conteh, Jun 13, 2009
    #12
  13. 80s champs

    80s champs Active Member Full Member

    536
    71
    Nov 9, 2005
    Ummmm I was putting size aside and refering more to talent. Say Hearns was at his prime at Lt heavyweight. In a pound for pound sense like at 154 where he was at his prime... Sure no way does a lt heavy hearns beat spinks,he lacks the durability. I'm speaking in his prime in a pound for pound sense. Or lets say Spinks was in his prime at 154. When he faces Hearns,not too confusing I hope.
     
    80s champs, Jun 13, 2009
    80s champs, Jun 13, 2009
    #13
  14. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    52,220
    27,723
    Jan 3, 2007
    Had Hearns elected to box very carefully, instead of getting lured into trading big shots, he might have given Spinks a decent fight, or at least for a while. Eventually however, I think Michael would have hunted him down, gotten some big shots in, and either KO'd or stopped Hearns. While I don't necessarily think that this fight has to be the mismatch that some are making it out to be, the odds simply don't rule in hearns' favor.
     
    mr. magoo, Jun 13, 2009
    mr. magoo, Jun 13, 2009
    #14
  15. Robbi

    Robbi Marvelous Full Member

    15,315
    299
    Jul 23, 2004
    I don't think this is fair. Far too unrealistic to call. We simply never seen the Hearns you're throwing upon us all.
     
    Robbi, Jun 13, 2009
    Robbi, Jun 13, 2009
    #15
Page 1 of 2