Michael Spinks or Michael Moorer.....who was better?

I'm wondering who the classic forum feels was the greater fighter, and also who you beleive accomplished more through out their career?

I think it's a interesting debate due the fact that both men have similar accomplishments, but while Spinks is a hall of famer, most people feel Michael Moorer is not even close.

Michael Spinks & Michael Moorer both were former light heavyweight champions, all though Spinks was far more accomplished at the weight. Each man also went up to heavyweight and claimed the lineal championship.

At a glace, here is how they stack up

Michael Spinks was the unified WBA,IBF, WBA Light heavyweight champ & IBF/Lineal Heavyweight Champions who had win against Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Dwight Muhammad Qawi and two controversial wins again Larry HOlmes. He also became the first man to move from Light Heavy and capture the Heavyweight title.

Michael Moorer was the former WBO light heavyweight champion, defending 9 times, knocking out every man he faced at the weight. He built himself up at heavyweight and became the WBA/IBF/lineal champion becoming the first southpaw to capture a Heavyweight title. He also captured a belt after losing the heavyweight crown.

Now besides getting your views on who was greater and accomplished more, I'd also be interesting knowing who you guys would favor in a fight between them, and how you think the bout would play out depending on which weight class they met at.

Discuss.

 

Moorer followed Spinks, and it's often debated how great he could of been at Light heavyweight, if he could of stayed at the weight class. I personally think Moorer beats Spinks at heavyweight, but at Light heavyweight he was to green to tell how he would of performed against him at that weight class.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5Unz7Mlf6s[/ame]

 

Someones a litte but hurt cause he can't handle I made you look like an idiot. I spelled out the comparisons, and you are acting like a baby cause you can't admit I'm right. Spinks is in the hall of fame, and so will Ricky hatton. The facts can't be debated, and in terms of accomplishments, comparisons can be made, and anyone that can't see that is mentally ******ed :good

 

BTW I agree that RICKY WILL BE IN THE H.O.F!!!! Just not that he is as great a fighter as Spinks. Comparisons can be made, but not viable ones IMO.

 

Moorer was such a young champion at light heavyweight so it's hard to gage how good he could of been if he maintained the weight. The mature version of him at Heavyweight would have a edge IMO. While Moorers chin was questionable at Heavy, I think he would be able to handle Spinks shots at the weight. Moorers power was never really in question and I beleive that gives him the edge if the 2 met at heavyweight in their prime.

 

It's alot easier to ban people rather than argue with them, I wish I had that novelty. :-(

 

At light heavy it's Michael Spinks for mine.