I like Canelo a lot but Mike Spinks is an all time great light heavyweight with terrific skills, huge power , speed and a long reach .. I see him cleanly outboxing Canelo and he can hurt him as well .. I can see a knockdown or two by Spinks along the way as well ..
I never said he was random. Is that the only way you know how to debate, when you’re losing ? He lost to ward who between 2012 to 2016 had only averaged about one fight a year. He was stopped by an aging contender who had only stopped one of his last six opponents. By the time he fought canelo he was what ? 37-38? And after getting a beat down retired. Kovalev was finished. My whole point is that you can’t compare Canello’s ONE claim at light heavy to facing a prime Michael spinks.
There you go again. Ward had acclimated to 175 and was in his third fight of the year against decent comp when he fought Kovalev. Eleider was undefeated and had a pretty good resume. He was at his peak when he beat Kovalev. Kovalev’s performance in the rematch was disciplined and impressive. Inventing false portrayals of boxers to fit an argument is not actually what debate is.
If washed up is top three in the division, being a defending champion, and coming off a big win earlier in the year, have at it.
Lots of people have been washed up while still being ranked at or near the top of their division. Ask very many people if they thought Ali was anywhere near prime when he fought Neon Leon
Using the best heavyweight of all time as an example—>not proving the point that you want to Now how many of these washed up champions logged one of their best wins 6 months or so earlier?