In threads like this, Spinks' flaws and weaknesses are usually brought up and he did have plenty of those. But I give him all the credit in the world for the 1st Ali fight. Yes, Ali was washed up and overconfident but Leon really took it to him from the opening bell to the finish. Considering he was not more than a pro novice, it would have been natural for him to fight cautiously, only trying to keep out of trouble and give a respectable showing but he fought all out and won the heavyweight championship of the world, when that title meant something. More skilled fighters like Shavers, Young and Norton were way too cautious, bought into the Ali hype and were seemingly content to last the distance. Leon didn't do that. He beat Muhammad Ali for the heavyweight championship of the world. That's something that can never be taken away from him.
I suppose if you wanted to make a "fact" case for Leon, it could be said that he was the fighter who won the title with the least amount of bouts (eight) prior to the Ali fight, and he was the only fighter to take the title from Ali in the ring, because if you think about it, any other losses Ali suffered, he was a non-title holder. This doesn't make Spinks a better fighter, just interesting facts he could add to his resume.
If he trained hard and turned Crusierweight earlier, he possibly could have been a Champion in that division. He was too small and with not a good enough chin to ever be a lasting legit. Heavyweight Champ. By the time he turned Cruiserweight, too much damage had been done. But, like others have said, he did beat Ali and did actually hold the Undisputed World Heavyweight title. He'd take that over being a long running Cruiserweight Champion, I am sure.
Good post. I think Leon wasn't the brightest bulb around and that probably actually helped him against Ali. Being young and releatively inexperienced probably helped, too. By that, I mean he seemed to just go out there and fight the way he was programmed to by George Benton. He probably didn't think too much about the situation and who he was fighting, or the ramifications of beating Ali. Of course, that same Naivite probably ensured he would screw everything up once he beat Ali.
I don't buy that story. It's classic excuse-making alibi for "The Greatest" ... "but he lost on purpose !" Sure, that's always a possibility in this crooked sport, but the fact is Ali looked like sh!t, just as sh!t, in so many of his other fights of the period. Or perhaps he'd been trying to lose those too.
I doubt Ali lost on purpose....take that savage pounding on purpose? Plus, to me winning the title a third time doesn't mean a damn thing. You only win a title a third time if you'd lost it before. Winning the rematch with Spinks to me meant nothing to Ali's legacy.
A lot of insiders and Vegas people think Ali threw the 1st fight because he was to lazy to train, and he wanted to be the 1st 3time Heavyweight Champion, and took Spinks for granted, to boot.. Ali was a glutton for pain, he took worse punishment from Foreman than Spinks, and Berbick as well and never quit against Holmes, he was inhuman about the amount of pain he could endure.. And whenever a fighter can avenge a rematch against a guy who beat his ass it's makes it 2x as sweet, remember Lennox against Rahman?
It wasn't just poor training habits. It was the drugs. The same thing undid a lot of 80s heavyweights. We can't know what he would have been. We just know that he was better before he started partying and lost the title.
He absolutely had the heart. He was involved in several brutal fights and dug deep in them. He got addicted to drugs and his chin wasn't good enough to avoid some KO losses with that ***** to the wall style (especially being so small for the division).
I think about the Spinks-Cobb fight a lot. How much they both put into that fight for so little potential reward, neither fighter ever being the same.
Would've been a long reigning cruiserweight champion, or a top contender at heavyweight until late 1981. Can't see him beating Page or Dokes, could upset ****ey, however.
Leon was a talent, you can't take that away from him. He did what he did to Ali because he was better on the night than Ali was just like Norton and shavers should have been if they were as good. Leon had the potential to be as good in the rematch and if he had of been he would have beat Ali twice. Coetzee beat Spinks fair and square,,I'm certain that would always have happened. That loss was not due to a decline, Leon was switched on and starting fast there. It was a great and under rated win for Coetzee. But that need not have been the end of Spinks. It was only a blow out. Trouble is, a fighter with talent needs enough fights to develop. I don't think Leon got that. All the training in the world and more sensible habits (which Spinks did NOT have) can't substitute for the required fights to realise a potential. Everything else Leon had going for him his career was also badly managed. So the question should not be "if Leon Spinks trained" it should also be "if he was brought along properly" but I have a hunch Leons personality got in the way of that. He perhaps was just too much of a crazy kid back then.
Beating Ali was probably the worst thing that could have happened to him in hindsight. Then again, as an undersized heavyweight with questionable commitment, a shaky chin and without a big punch, perhaps he wouldn't have gone much further anyway. He did have a nice win against Mercado later on.