Michael Spinks and his reign as Heavyweight Champ - Questions

Ali vs Leon Spinks (6-0-1) Olympic Champ and Marine veteran (In 1990, his son, Leon Calvin, was shot to death in East St. Louis as he was driving home from his girlfriend's house. Leon Calvin, 19, was a light heavyweight boxer who had turned pro the month before his murder). Most boxers go thru "bell" for us fight fans with little return at their ends).

 

Spinks was a disappointment? How many light heavyweight champions go on to win the hwt championship? Not many. The manner in which he lost the championship is Spinks biggest black eye as a hwt.

 

He hadn't been ranked for 3 years.Spinks chose him, to avoid defending against Tony Tucker.

 

I think it's reasonable to want a champion to face his top contender every year, so it's legitimate to criticize Spinks for failing to do so in 1987 imo. I can see why he took the Cooney fight, but he could have made room for a defence against a top contender as well that year.

 

The way I see it Spinks whole heavyweight adventure was based purely on beating Holmes. A one fight deal. Once he did it, I won't say he was a reluctant champion, but I sense Micheal felt he had paid his dues already at his own weight class and that he knew he was limited as to how far he could take things beyond that.

I even think he was persuaded to stay on fight by fight. Initially just for a rematch. Then I believe he took Tangstad only to keep the belt long enough for Butch Lewis to negotiate another big payday. I get the impression he was talked into it.

Hats off to Spinks though. He pulled it off. each time he was talked into one more fight he kept winning.

Tony Tucker was a "who needs him" guy. Obviously talented, but untested. If the money was no better than Cooney, an inactive but known quantity, who represents the same risk who the hell needs Tucker? The grounds for Tucker being their #1 was not based on anything much.

I have never understood why in these situations the untested contender isn't forced to fight a former title challenger like Cooney in the first place. I think when a champion is offered a more lucrative fight it is down to the sanctioning body pushing the unknown kid into scuppering that offer by telling the contender he must take on the lucrative challenger or lose his lofty rating. It saves potentially stripping Their own champion and having to justify a suitable vacant nomination with another unknown.

If governing bodies made a policy that all mandatory challengers beat at least one recent title challenger then untested guys like Tucker would not wind up in vacant title fights or having champions refusing to meet them. It's not that the champ is afraid, he wants to know the reward for taking these fights is worthy of the risk.

a Tangstad fight was as big as a Tucker fight would have been. After all, the vacant title fight between Tucker and Douglas was an undercard bout.

 

undisputed unification of his own division

holmes twice

tyson

cooney

another

thats more than the Klitschkos put together.

 

That is a great post. The last chapter is spot on.

Spinks imo got Holmes at the right time and in the wrong frame of mind. The press and oddsmakers had him having an extremely easy time of it and he himself believed that for sure.

Spinks was the only winner you could have in the first fight with Holmes being extremely slow and lethargic. Not only was he significantly declined but he wasn't suitably prepared, particularly for the spirited battle Spinks put forth. Spinks came in with a flawless fightplan and enthusiasm in abundance. Full credit to Spinks for getting the job done.

Holmes got the better of the second fight imo tho some had it very close and some even penned it for Spinks. Holmes came in fully on point this time knowing what he was up against. Spinks gave away the first 4 rounds running away from a noticably fresher Holmes but came on after that as Holmes age slowed him up.

Spinks had some serious problems sparring Greg Page and to a lesser degree Timmy Witherspoon. By his own admission Page gave him quite a torrid time and put some doubt into his Heavyweight ambitions. I think Michael would have run into real trouble fighting the younger top tier heavies of the time and i think he knew it. He would have been awkward for them but the younger guys would have been a little sharp and not inclined to tire as much imo. I don't think Michael's chin would have stood up and i think it fair to say it was still a question mark at Heavyweight as he really did not get hit much prior to Tyson.

Kudo's to him going in and being the guy to step up and take the title from Holmes and he made the most of it cruising by a couple of easier guys and then getting the big money vs Tyson. Add his Heavyweight success to his short (number of fights) but superb career at 175 and you have a great fighter.

 

First bout was a clear Spinks win. Second bout I thought was clearly Holmes. I remember I was going to shut off the tv and go out for the night the decision in my mind was a done deal. I decided to watch the decision and my jaw dropped to my chest. Horrible injustice as Holmes was the aggressor the entire bout, manhandled Spinks and hurt him numerous times for naught.

 

I never realised Spinks spared Witherspoon and page? That would be perfect training.

Spinks game plan was perfect. I believe it centred on Larry being the age he was and getting him tired. Larry neede to drain himself to a state where He was too tired to use his size.

 

He sparred Tex Cobb around the same time too. He said Page hit harder than Witherspoon and put some hurt on him. He spoke pretty high of Tim too and whilst quieter about Cobb he respected him too. Hopefully i run across this mag again, readi it a few months back but put it back in the piles.

 

The accounts of Spinks sparring Page and Spoon would align with the idea that he and his camp knew that he couldn't contend with a prime, live top-10 Heavyweight. Thus, why he didn't pursue that course.

Once this was understood and, despite his win over Holmes, it became a case of navigating himself through a couple of sitters, before cashing out. And, he did so quite nicely, in probably one of the richest fights, at the time (I think).

Spinks was industrious and had created an opportunity for himself, albeit with a bit of luck along the way. He walked away clean, with over $10M, if I recall correctly, after his 91 seconds with Tyson.

 

I think he was offered much more to fight Cooney than Tucker. He seems to have been a bit lowballed with the offer for Tucker, actually. But ideally he could have fought both.

 

Bingo. He was coming back in mid 92 with the aim to fight Holyfield, with no warm ups from memory. Said his knee was a lot better. I don't recall what derailed this offhand.

 

Fighting Tony Tucker would have been dumb.
Tucker was virtuallly unknown and brought nothing to the table, no money and not much credibility.

Gerry Cooney was not a deserving challenger either but people wanted to see him and if Spinks hadn't fought him, Tyson's camp would have got that payday.
Berbick was trying to fight Cooney in 1986 but Don King had Berbick fight Tyson. Cooney's people were desperate to get him a title shot. And Butch Lewis was keen to get Spinks a worthwhile payday at heavyweight, not some small-money fight against a Tony Tucker, a Buster Douglas or a Carl Williams.