Michael spinks vs Ezzard Charles and why?

If people don't agree with you, it doesn't necessarily mean they are stupid - maybe it's simply a case of them honestly seeing things differently. Have you ever thought about that?

Also, Morlock, in dream match-ups no opinion is 100% "correct"... which I thought would be pretty obvious!

 

Tha ****?

 

Well the comments per Holmes never hurt Spinks and Spinks not going to the body are certainly 100% incorrect.

He needs to actually watch the fights and fighters he is talking about to educate himself.

 

I think Spinks probably deserves to be much closer to Ezzard Charles. Beating Larry Holmes was something a lot of great fighters could not have done. Spinks made Larry look a lot more washed up than he actually was. That version of Holmes would not have lost to any other available heavyweight that night..he probably would have started favourite over Thomas even then. But Spinks gets no credit for this.

Spinks suffers because of the Tyson fight and the much shorter career...but he was a great fighter too.

There is a much larger body of work to look at in Charles career...but as you say it probably isn’t good to fight as often as that. I don’t think Charles suffered much for opportunity did he? There literally isn’t somebody he didn’t fight. Brave management and an abundance of fighters.

it would certainly have been more difficult for Charles to do so much with the 30 odd fights Spinks had.

overall, I think these are both great fighters. I think Charles is the one who deserves to be where he is and Spinks deserves a bit more.

 

Charles wins on points

 

Because I agreed 100% with what he wrote. I believe he was correct.

 

So you agree that Spinks has every advantage over Charles?

 

No - but calling someone who thinks so stupid, is maybe a bit harsh.

 

Well anybody who writes Charles off vs anybody at light-heavyweight probably is.

 

Every adv? It is Bull.

 

Charles wins. Spinks, tough guy but Charles that extra better. I'll even say Charles could stop him.

 

Charles is clearly superior pound-for-pound, but that is mitigated by Spinks' size advantage and his own tremendous talent.

I picture Charles staggering Michael once or twice with a counter right to the Jinx, followed up quickly with a flurry as he pushes the taller man to the ropes. I could see a similar scenario unfold for Michael if Charles should miss with a leaping hook. Because of the firepower staring back from the opposite corner, I don't think either would really press for a firefight. Spinks, in particular, would try his best to control distance with his jab.

I'm going to go with Charles in a very close decision. It might look like the Qawi fight, only with Ezzard improving on that gutty, albeit losing, performance.

 

He was clearly hurt in the rematch

 

I'm convinced you never watched either Holmes-Spinks bout... or any Spinks bout.