Michael Moorer vs Michael Spinks at 175 and at HW

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Big Ukrainian, Dec 4, 2015.


  1. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    50,690
    24,222
    Jan 3, 2007
    In fairness, Holyfield was in pretty poor form for that first meeting with Moorer. What Holy did in the rematch pretty much confirmed it, despite being years older. But that being said, I agree with you about Moorer needing to be slightly favored at Heavyweight. He was the naturally bigger man with good power, southpaw style and a tad more proven over 200 lbs.. Its not inconceivable that Spinks could win.. But the problem is that we never really saw the types of performances that showed us what he was capable of at that weight. The Holmes he defeated in 85-86 was shot, arguably lost to Carl Williams and got robbed in one of those fights with Michael. C00ney basically showed up to collect a paycheck.. Tangstad was an obscurity who had no business with a rating.. And Tyson dispatched him in 91 seconds.. Moorers heavyweight career wasn't stellar. But he at least beat legit contenders in Botha, Cooper, Stewart, Schultz and for whatever its worth - that ill prepared version of Holy. Certainly a bit more to go by than what Spinks left us with.
     
    Smoochie and Flash24 like this.
  2. heizenberg

    heizenberg Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,981
    283
    Nov 6, 2013
    At light heavyweight gotta go with Spinks just based on being more proven. At heavyweight its tough to say I feel Moorer on his best day at Heavyweight was better but Spinks was much more consistent in how he performed. Would've been a very good fight in both weight classes.
     
  3. Saad54

    Saad54 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,814
    6,558
    Dec 10, 2014
    Spinks wins both.

    He's too unorthodox and smart for Moorer.
     
  4. Xplosive

    Xplosive Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,158
    9,615
    Jun 23, 2008
    Spinks by stoppage at 175 and by decision at heavyweight. He was plain and simple a better fighter than Moorer.

    At 175 I wouldn't pick Moorer over Eddie Mustafa and Qawi, let alone Spinks - who beat both.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  5. Muhammed_Ali_Durmaz

    Muhammed_Ali_Durmaz Devon 2 banned Full Member

    145
    45
    Dec 18, 2019
    Michael Moorer could always punch at both weights and he was fast and I don't care how skilled Spinks was, the casual fans will never understand how much being a southpaw can affect the fight, the orthodox fighter could have all advantages, but if he doesn't know how to box a southpaw, then what good are his advantages really? It turns into a punchers chance, and I never know of Spinks boxing a southpaw, there weren't many southpaws around back then for whatever reason. I say Moorer on points
     
  6. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft He Who Saw The Deep Full Member

    27,021
    44,582
    Mar 3, 2019
    Spinks to all except harder puncher at HW.