Harold Johnson was an outstanding light heavyweight and fairly decent heavyweight. Crafty boxer, great shape, determined.. He won five world title fights.. Beat guys like Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles, Eddie Machen, Jimmy Bivens, Nino Valdez, Arturo Godoy, Doug Jones, Clarence Henry, etc.. Probably an underrated resume if truth be told. Shame he didn't get a rematch after losing the title to Willie Pastrano. Not sure why it didn't come off.. Willie lost a non title fight to Gregorio Peralta a few months after lifting the crown from Johnson.. Then instead of fighting Johnson, rematched Peralta ( this time for the title ) and lost it altogether. But weather it be against Pastrano or Peralta, Johnson SHOULD have gotten another title fight... Anyway, its a tough call between him and Spinks. Michael is commonly rated much higher at light heavyweight than Harold Johnson is and understandably given that he was never beaten in that class, had about 11 title fight wins, the olympic gold medal, etc.. Not sure I'd rank Michael's opposition over Harold's though.. Let's just say its close.. Spinks was taller, rangier, had the reach and was awkward.. he also hit like a truck at 175. That and he appeared to be a bit more consistent than Johnson... Tough fight to choose but I'm leaning towards Spinks by decision... Harold Johnson is vastly underrated however and shouldn't be counted out.
Johnson would, I feel....at his very best, pull off a great upset and win a close decision over Spinks.
Agreed, its so far off from his style I cant imagine how someone labels spinks like that More of a boxer puncher imo
Spinks is an awkward crafty boxer puncher who's always just out of range and has an uncanny ability to leverage his punches from any angle. Johnson is a master technician with one of the best jabs ever seen. If I could describe Johnson in one word it would be textbook and I think you need something a bit better than that to figure out Spinks. Spinks UD.
