Michael Spinks vs Bob Foster At LHW

Saw Foster defend his title in person...Foster by KO over Spinks.

 

Id pick Spinks. He was better than anyone Foster ever beat and Foster wouldn't have the same dramatic advantages in height, reach, and power against Spinks that he had against most of his opposition. Spinks also beat better opposition than Foster did.

 

I agree. My mind's always changing about it.

 

tOss up i go with FostEr by ko

 

SliGHT? Lmao

 

I don't think Foster had any edge whatsoever in power. Spinks probably had the edge, actually.

 

get out of my view stupid troll

 

Hide me then, ya silly twit.

 

Are you serious? Spinks was a massive puncher with either hand at 175, probably as hard as anyone ever. Foster may have had a "slight" advantage, or not. Both have legimate one punch ko power as proven many many times.

Both are on the absolute top line of 175 punchers ever.

 

Mike @175. Leon at heavy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

please don't be ignorant Michael Spinks never was a real one hand puncher he was a combination puncher hE HAd to Hi

 

please don't be ignorant Michael Spinks never was a real one hAnd puncher he was a combination puncher hE HAd to Hit U 200 times to stop you. he never ever was like moorer. Moore oR Bob Foster

 

First off, I truly believe Foster is one of the best ever fighters to have a career at the 175 pound limit. He had a god given ability to explode dynamite with one single punch. In fact that thread the other day about one shot power, Foster certainly had it.

However he was a bit one dimensional but was able to compensate due to his physical abilities. His jab wasn't the most technical out there but because of his range it was very hard to counter. His footwork wasn't the greatest but because of his size it took fewer steps to cut the ring off. His speed, power and timing were spot on though. But stalking behind the jab, detonating that left hook, it did the job during his career and you can't take that away from him. Obviously he couldn't dictate pace and range against anyone who had a physical advantage over him, but he despite his technical flaws, he was a great.

Spinks was incredibly multi dimensional imo. He could spoil, he could out work, he could sharp shoot, he could jab and move, he could fire hard combinations as he went for the kill. I know some question his punching technique but he never faced anyone able to exploit his lack of finesse.

If Foster can sit Spins at the end of that jab, he'll control the fight. However if Spinks can beat him to the punch, stay out of range and out maneuver Foster I believe he'll stop him late.

For me it comes down to levels. Foster had one strategy and he showed an inability to adapt when it failed him. Spinks overcame many styles with many game plans and he showed an inability to keep Tyson off him.

But Foster is no Tyson and his chin is more suspect imo.

Spinks by a hard fought ko.

 

OMG

You've got Michael mixed up with Leon

 

I know perfectly who was Michael Spinks and I'll tell you that you are ignorant he never was the puncher that Foster,moore,or moorer were