Holmes Never Lost to Spinks

:huh Um, aren't you contradicting what you just said and used as the topic of this thread?

 

Then watch the fight you moron!atsch

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Sorry Bill, i don't buy this one bit and it simply doesn't work this way. If you were Spinks and thought you were ahead going into the 15th what would you do? The man was correct in his deduction scoring wise. Should he trade and give the bigger stronger Holmes his only chance of winning? If a guy was winning a marathon would he wait near the end for others to catch up to give them a better shot?

Larry ran against Shavers in their first fight, whats up with that? Holmes is Spinks Shavers, much much bigger and stronger with the ability to take him out - fast if he gets the shots.

I was actually surprised at Spinks aggressiveness thru some stages of the fight once he got comfortable.

Spinks, SRL vs Hagler, Whitaker in some fights, great examples of why we call it the sweet science.

 

Spinks fought like he was the vastly smaller man with much less strength, power and durability. Oops, that's what he was! Brilliant gameplan that got the job done.

I can't believe you are commending Conn for getting stupid and overconfident likely resulting in a knockout loss but degrading Spinks for staying smart and true to his gameplan and physicality and pulling off a huge upset win.

Sorry mate, but on this one we are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

 

Amen to that

:good

 

Holmes picked the wrong guy at the wrong time. He showed his age against Carl Williams and got a very close decision against Williams that many might think was a gift. He should have retired then. Instead, he picks a guy who might be a style nightmare. Spinks was very fast with hands and feet, with excellent conditioning, and was prime. Holmes simply figured his size advantage would win the day, but Spinks nullified it with speed, footwork, awkwardness, punch volume and spurts, and the will of a champion. Holmes was too minimalist with his output and no longer had the legs or even the speed of old to deal with this willow of the wisp. That's true regardless of how you scored the fights. Spinks had a diminished Larry in front of him.

 

He got the benefit of the doubt in his fights with Witherspoon and Williams. How many more should he get? Even superstars on't get the benefit every time- and Holmes certainly wasn't one of them. He was beaten by a few rounds regardless...no debate.

 

I havent analyzed the second fight , but I had Spinks ahead by 5 points after the fifteenth round of the first fight . I really cant see how anyone can have a argument for Holmes the first time

 

And you're telling me Holmes was willing to risk a thing when he was jabbing-only early against Cooney as well as doing nothing after he knocked him down in the second?

It's called ring general ship, Holmes made an art of it against Cooney (and others) and Spinks was the better ring general against Holmes, end of story.

And you tell me how brave it was for Holmes to risk in exchanging uppercuts with Tyson when he was hurt badly. Brave? Sure. Got knocked senseless? Yep.

 

It doesn't matter whether you win or lose Chris, it's how you play the game, or in this case find a surefire way to get yourself knocked out in a fight you coulda, shoulda, woulda won

 

I think Holmes clearly was beaten in the 1st fight by Spinks and I dont think it was close, I thought Spinks did enough to win the 2nd fight also but it was closer. Holmes was the challenger for the rematch and did not come close to do enough to take Spinks title. Spinks was a different level than the David Beys,Ossie Ocasio's, Leon Spinks,Smiths,Franks,Marvis, and Michael Spinks came to acually WIN

 

To be fair on Holmes Bummy he was the champ in the first and i don't think there was much difference in the winning margins of the two different deserved fighters, Holmes in the rematch, Spinks in I. How you could score Spinks in the rematch i';ll never know, it's akin to giving Larry the initial encounter.

 

I just watched the fight again recently and as I said the 1st fight I thought Spinks won clearly...the 2nd fight was closer but Spinks was Champ and Holmes did not do enough to take his title, I thought Mike Pulled it out

 

Well i can't see how, but each to their own. What rounds did you give Spinks in the rematch out of interest?