Michael Spinks @ heavyweight in the 60s and prior

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by superman1986, Jul 8, 2017.


  1. superman1986

    superman1986 Active Member banned Full Member

    747
    383
    Jul 4, 2017
    At heavyweight, Spinks was actually about the same size as Ali. Even though Ali looked impressive against Williams, he wasn't exactly the most quality opponent. With all due respect to Ali, it would have looked pretty bad if he was anything less than impressive. Considering the fact that Williams had one fully functional leg and had been out of the ring for 2 years recovering from a 357 magnum gunshot wound that almost killed him. Ironically, Williams would later die by being hit by a car.

    And he had already been knocked out 3 times at or near his prime. I liked Ali's performance but you can't compare Spinks to that version of Williams who was the equivalent of Cooney in opposition quality. Cooney could actually be said to be better quality, since he at least had 2 functional legs and was significantly taller and heavier and Spinks had a significant size disadvantage . The Michael Spinks that poleaxed Gerry Cooney likely could have repeated the same thing vs a 1967 Cleveland Williams.

    I do believe Ali would have gotten to Spinks, but Spinks could have made it more competitive than many think. Simply because of his style. I have a hunch that Ali stops Spinks late on his feet, especially a 15 rounder or alternatively, wins a clear cut UD. At the very least, I'd say Spinks durability at heavyweight probably fell somewhere between Patterson and Norton.
     
    khaosai galaxi likes this.
  2. superman1986

    superman1986 Active Member banned Full Member

    747
    383
    Jul 4, 2017
    That is true. Watching Liston follow Ali in a straight line really is frustrating. If he could have cut off the ring, things might have went as planned for Liston. I don't believe that the 22 year old Ali that Liston fought was as durable as the 32 year old Ali that Foreman fought. Ali was only slightly heavier at 32 than at 22, but I believe his body had just matured more.
     
    khaosai galaxi likes this.
  3. khaosai galaxi

    khaosai galaxi Superbad Full Member

    2,979
    2,510
    Apr 17, 2017
    You have a point.
     
    mark ant likes this.
  4. slender4

    slender4 Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,959
    2,031
    Apr 26, 2006
    Spinks was the most underrated fighter of my lifetime. He would have beaten most of those guys except maybe Ali, and Frazier. He was better than Foster or any of the other LHWTS moving up.
     
    superman1986 likes this.
  5. slender4

    slender4 Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,959
    2,031
    Apr 26, 2006
    I doubt many boxers in the pre-Tyson/ Holyfield era were roiding. Spinks was a stringbrean in his prime; at 6'2 he usually came in UNDER the LHWT limit. I think Norton was the guy juicing in the 70s.
     
    Rock0052 likes this.
  6. Rock0052

    Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

    34,221
    5,875
    Apr 30, 2006
    I hate to do this because I am a Spinks fan, and I have to emphasize that this doesn't lessen his standing, but there's a lot of flags...
    -he put on 25 lbs of muscle in 3 months while simultaneously lowering his body fat from over 9% to the 7's while moving up for Holmes I. For a young fighter that's one thing, but Spinks was 29 years old. That's a massive red flag in a sport where 15 round conditioning is required.

    -Shilstone wasn't an old school guy. He's on record admitting steroids worked and never played dumb about them. I see no reason he would have avoided them, especially given the need to put on as much good muscle mass on Mike as quick as possible.

    -forget testing- they weren't even banned in boxing. None of the witch-hunt stigma attached to them after the Ben Johnson fiasco existed.

    For a heavy underdog moving up and an unconventional boxing trainer, it'd have been folly NOT to be on anything legal that would help their cause. They'd have no way of knowing people 30 years later would judge them for it, and frankly, I doubt they'd care if they did.

    I agree with you on his 175 career. It didn't look suspicious to me until the quick move up.
     
  7. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Williams did better defensively against Liston in their 1st meeting until getting caught than Cooney did against Spinks, Spinks wouldn`t have landed as many punches on the big cat partly because Williams was a sharper puncher than Cooney and would constantly be ready to catch Spinks as he attacked, the same way he did for a while against Liston except Spinks didn`t have Liston`s power at heavy and that`s what saved Liston against Williams, if Sonny had MS`s power the match would have been close, Williams was a more competent boxer than Cooney who was very easy for Spinks to read.
     
  8. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,029
    Sep 22, 2010
    you beleiving farmboxer sparred him in the 20th century is all I need by way of answer.
     
  9. superman1986

    superman1986 Active Member banned Full Member

    747
    383
    Jul 4, 2017
    I'm not talking about prime Williams...I meant the 67 version. But, keep in mind, Bob Satterfield at 176 lbs stopped Williams. Left him out like a light. Granted, Williams wasn't at his peak, but he had a 31- 1 record going into the fight. Satterfield was the size of Spinks at LHW.
    I think that Spinks at 200+ lbs would have handled even a prime Williams and had enough firepower behind his shots to dent Williams chin. Michael Spinks was just a better fighter.

    He'd have demolished the 1967 version of Williams. Maybe a prime Williams was better than Cooney, but by 67, he was the same kind of opponent as 87 Cooney.
     
  10. superman1986

    superman1986 Active Member banned Full Member

    747
    383
    Jul 4, 2017
    His physique always looked natural to me. Now Holyfield looked like he was carved out of granite.
     
  11. slender4

    slender4 Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,959
    2,031
    Apr 26, 2006
    It's certainly possible. But Spinks was 199 against Holmes, and he really had no muscle tone. He looked like a guy who had been eating a lot.

    I don't think there were many boxers on steroids in the 70s. Boxing really didn't even adapt modern athletic training methods until Holyfield, and then his shots were like pea shooters, hit Holmes 1000 times and never backed him off for a second.
     
  12. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    No but a lot of fighters don`t have organised training camps, during the 80`s when former world champ Nigel Benn was first being noticed he didn`t really bother sparring, rumors were at the time Benn`s defense was so bad they didn`t want him getting decked during sparring and ruining his rep to the British press who were comparing him to Mike Tyson!