"Jimmy Ellis of '68 vs. Michael Spinks of '87." Who the better man at 200 pounds?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MRBILL, Feb 21, 2011.


  1. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    I know that's the general consensus, but Spinks of 1986 and 1987 was now adjusted between 200 to 210 pounds with little fat in the tummy area, yet still had movement, good power and decent speed... He was very deceiving...

    Tyson was simply all wrong for anybody in 1988, but he was good for a nice retirement check....

    MR.BILL:deal
     
  2. PetethePrince

    PetethePrince Slick & Redheaded Full Member

    28,760
    86
    May 30, 2009
    Spinks is just the better fighter.
     
  3. hussleman

    hussleman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,976
    18
    Jun 14, 2006
    Spinks by ud, 15 rounds.
     
  4. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    Forgive me, but is Ellis in the IBHOF up in New York...:huh

    MR.BILL:bbb
     
  5. thegoldenera

    thegoldenera Guest

    except for foreman,liston and maybe holyfield
     
  6. thegoldenera

    thegoldenera Guest

    jimmy ellis was better fighter than michael spinks at 200 pounds
     
  7. abraq

    abraq Active Member Full Member

    1,376
    20
    Sep 17, 2007
    Very good matchup. After thinking about this for a while I cannot quite make up my mind.

    P4p it's definitely Spinks. But at 200, I agree with Mr. Bill here. This is too hard to hit the nail on the head.
     
  8. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    I was talkin' bout the 1980s heavies who were available.

    MR.BILL:deal
     
  9. red cobra

    red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

    38,042
    7,583
    Jul 28, 2004
    With his tender skin and propensity to bleed, you might say that Cooper was the "British Jose Napoles".
     
  10. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    58,636
    13,820
    Jul 28, 2009
    I don't think so either. Spinks may not have been a great heavyweight, but his overall class as a fighter probably makes him better regardless. When I think of Ellis, I think of a well-faded GOB really damaging him, and, in my opinion, winning, and the fact that he had some good rounds against Ali he wasn't given credit for, but ultimately in a fight Ali could've quit diddledicking around in and stopped Ellis much earlier, the way I interpreted the action. Not a great heavyweight either, Ellis. Good, of course, but I think Spinks would've been a little bit separated from him, and Ellis might just as easily have been blown out the same way against Tyson. No trouble imagining it really.
     
  11. DaveK

    DaveK Vicious & Malicious Full Member

    3,668
    36
    Mar 2, 2009
    Spinks would be bigger here, and that matters to Spinks in terms of his.mentality and how he approaches the fight.

    Ellis got bossed around by Patterson (getting an undeserved win), but made Quarry look ordinary, bossing him...

    Tough one to call. I would think Spinks' awkward style gives Ellis trouble. I also don't think he moves quite so much or fights like he fought anyone at HW, because he was fighting taller, stronger guys who.could potentially crack.

    I'd say Spinks by decision.
     
  12. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,795
    2,396
    Aug 26, 2004
    My guess is Spinks was the better fighter but Ellis had some respectable wins

    Funny but Hurricane Carter dropped and beat Jimmy as a middleweight and on another note Vincente Rondon, Light Heavyweight champ who went the distance with feared Heavyweight puncher Earnie Shavers got stopped by Bennie Briscoe and Jose Gonzales at middleweight

    I think overall Spinks was the better fighter at any weight