Michael Spinks vs Larry Holmes II

Had it to Holmes, 9-6.

Thought he won the first 6 rounds.

Landed his jab, landed the harder shots, did more damage. Spinks flurries and shoeshines were impressive and scoring in the first fight. I didn't find them effective here. Lots were cuffing, and in the beginning of the fight, he just refused to throw.

Its not a historic robbery, but I have always believed this was a bad decision.

And I'm not a Holmes fan at all. Spinks is the man, Holmes was an *******.

 

This is true, though somewhat balanced out by him kind of looked like a big angry brown pear by this time.

 

I agree, he has the case for those rounds. This is why you can't call it a robbery, imo. There is a conceivable, rational way for the judges to score Spinks the fight.

For the record, I don't think Holmes dropped either. He got outlanded but outjabbed and outpunched Spinks in 5, and I tend to prefer big damage, when it occurs, to popgun flurries. I agree that 14 was very close, but I'd have MUCH rather been Holmes in the round, nearly flooring my foe.

Not a robbery. But Holmes won, in my mind.

 

It is my opinion on most robberies. Rather than talk ****, I always encourage true boxing fans who understand the sport to try to score it from the judges perspective, ringside. Try to see what they are seeing in the action, not just what you are seeing in your TV broadcast influenced by your opinions.

When you do this, its clear fights like Holmes-Spinks II, DLH-Sturm, and Morales-Diaz aren't robberies, but close fights that may have gone the wrong way.

It also cements just how awful decisions like Pea-Chavez and Lewis-Holyfield are.

Cheers.

 

Dramatic night.

Holmes broke his right thumb in the third round, yet that night I felt he still did enough to edge out his bedeviling foe.

Spinks proved he was a very tough nut to crack, a great light heavyweight succeeding against truly big men where so many others his size over the decades had failed. Incidentally, the way Tyson crushed Spinks like a bug certifies Mike's all-time-great stature.

When the decision was announced, Larry says he told Giachetti: "****, I got a big mouth."

As far as the 14th round is concerned, Larry says he saw Spinks was on ***** street after that big, painfully-thrown, right hand, but suddenly discovered a fighter's natural killer instinct had abandoned him...and he let Spinks get away. Make of it what you will.

And he wrote this poem:

Boxing's politics is what we're talking about--
the only thing worse that being knocked out.
Promotor gets the money, fighter gets the pain;
that's how it goes in the boxing game.

 

I was so pissed back in '86 with two of the judges who voted for Spinks.... Joe Cortez voted for Holmes 144-141.... That was fair..... I used to own a copy, but I recorded over the tape during a Three Stooges marathon....

MR.BILL:deal

 

I tend to score it 9-6 for Holmes. Unlike the first fight, I've never scored it for Spinks.

On the controverisal 14th round, I think that the more effective punching was done by Holmes and that tips a close round in his favour in my book.

 

Round 14 was Holmes'.

 

Had Holmes actually knocked down Spinks or jumped on him after he stunned him with that right hand in the 14th, it would've been his round. Spinks's round hands down.

 

Yeah he did. He landed with a little combination at the end of the round. Leonard and the other commentator were stunned that Holmes didn't go after Spinks.

 

That round is what you value. I cansee a round sway To a guy if he gets outlanded but does THE effective work of the round.