Michael Spinks vs prime Holmes

Spink s goes the distance but loses a wide decision.

 

Good breakdown

 

Holmes would probably have stopped him. The delivery in his right hand and his overall timing with his punches was noticeably better from 1978-1982 than it was in 1983-1986. From 1983 on, Holmes's reflexes and hand speed were deteriorating steadily with each fight. Spinks was able to capitalize on this using the gap in speed and flurrying before quickly turning and getting out of dodge before Holmes could get his own punches off. He managed to do that well enough to scrape by with a close win and a controversial win against Holmes who was pushing 36/37 years old at the time. To me at least, Holmes actually looked a bit quicker in their 1985 fight than he did in 1986. Just in 1986, he fought with more effort and threw his right more. A 30 year old Larry Holmes would have felt little threat from Spinks and would have had the energy to stay on him and had the speed to land way more frequently.

Basically, I think Spinks was a very difficult style for Larry to fight as he got older, but I don't see him being much of a threat to a prime Holmes. Probably would've been more of an awkward, annoying person to fight and track down moreso than actual threat to lose to.

 

I will saythis- I think Spinks always beats him. Larry had trouble with Spinks speed, and Larry was not a slow fighter in 1985. Spinks had the style and was moving up. The question is can Spinks with a couple of years getting used to the weight fight a prime Holmes? Then that evens it up again. Remember Spinks moved from 175 and beat Holmes at heavyweight. I picked Holmes to win early in 1985. And then in the rematch Larry comes out firing and still goes 15. Spinks was trouble for him.

 

Well said.

 

We saw this version, it was the Spinks that Tyson fought. Would you say this version is better than the one Holmes fought?

Even the Holmes who fought Witherspoon is far better than the one who fought Spinks let alone a young version.

 

Well Michael Spinks was not fighting Larry Holmes that night in June 88. In retrospect I believe Tyson would have probably stopped the Spinks of 1985-1987 -including the Spinks who fought Cooney- just on his style of getting Spinks to the ropes and going to the body. As a matter of fact I believe Tyson of 1988 stops any heavyweight version of Spinks. Larry did not punch like Mike. Sort of like why did Hearns stop Duran and Ray didn't. Hearns said himself before the fight, I punch much harder than Ray.

I will admit that prior to the fight in 1987 they had the Cooney vs Spinks fight on ABC in prime time at night-and they had Tyson and Spinks side by side and I was surprised how much taller Michael was than Mike Tyson. So that made me think Spinks was not that small a guy, and he also matched up well to Larry in height. That was just superficial. He was not as small as I thought he would look against Larry or Mike. So I always gave him a good shot at beating Tyson just on that.

I forget whom I thought would win the Spinks vs. Tyson fight in 1988, but I might have picked Spinks. I didn't expect what happened.

For me to say the Spinks who lost in less than a round is better than the one who beat Holmes certainly does not look formidable, but styles make fights and that was probably the best Mike Tyson ever was..Either way Mike usually exposed the chin of smaller fighters more than most on his style. He stops Spinks in one round, but goes 4 with Larry who did ok until the 4th round. About Spinks and Holmes. I will say I think the Spinks who fought Cooney would in my mind edge a decision over the Holmes who fought Cooney.

Certainly Holmes could very well have beaten Spinks when he was younger, but the speed of Spinks and his skills and slick defense offset Larry. And he had underrated power as the Tangstad and Cooney fights showed.

 

I don't think Spinks was anywhere near that clear a winner in the first fight...I do have him winning by a point, though. That's another fight that could have gone either way imo. Spinks certainly never once really hurt Larry in any way, while the latter did hurt the former more than once. Spinks surprised Larry...but overall Michael's plan was admirably made. He knew Larry was ripe for plucking.

Not to take away from Michael's win in that first fight and its significance, but I'd be shocked if anyone gave Spinks more than two or three point lead in that fight. It was not a consummate win by any stretch of the imagination, and I know trainers, boxers, and pundits whom were openly critical of Spinks's performace.

All that said, Spinks came up with a great plan. He knew Larry was massively diminished without the jab, and he knew that Larry's victories were often based on timing his opponent. By giving Larry a million different fighting "faces" during the fight, Larry never had any kind of grounds to base his timing on. It was a super-smart plan and it worked...except Spinks was incapable of hurting Larry, so that win will always be looked upon as bizarre and not-exactly-emulable.

Spinks had a light-heavyweight chin. Larry would have ruined him, the jab and right combinations make him reel and stagger by the ninth. He'd probably score at least a knockdown (let's not forget the half a dozen times Larry had him hurt in the second fight and that 14th round), then the typical Holmes avalanche-of-rights until the ref stops it.

I'm surprised so many people think there would be a decision. Spinks' whole life would have been ruined by the uppercut.

The Tyson fight was a cash grab, look at Michael's scared-to-death eyes before the fight. He planned on checking out early. I don't entirely blame him.

 

No offense to anyone's taste, but in the spirit of honesty I kind of snicker when I read about Spinks beating a prime Holmes. That's a little too far fetched, people.

No offense to anyone, as I said I'm just being honest.

 

I would recommend you watch both fights over again. I think Spinks clearly won the first fight he landed something like 70 or 80 more punches then Holmes through the duration of the fight. As I stated in an earlier reply punch stats do not win fights but again it’s worth noting It’s also worth noting that Spinks also out landed Holmes in the second fight, by a slim margin I don’t remember hearing anyone at the time other than maybe Holmes claim that he was robbed in the first fight.
Now the second fight was controversial, however if you look at the consensus of ringside score cards from boxing pundits at the time most of them had it a one point fight one way or the other once again not a robbery. I posted my scorecard in an earlier post telling everyone which rounds I gave to which man. I’d be curious to see the score cards of the people that think Holmes won going away that are commenting as such in this thread.

As I stated earlier prime for prime at heavyweight I definitely pick Larry Holmes To win. I’m just voicing my opinion on the two fights that we actually saw that happened

 

I had Holmes ahead by one point.It was fight which was difficult to score and could have gone either way in my opinion,The persistent clean work with the jab of Holmes against the combinations of Spinks.I think Holmes deflected a lot of those combos.But I am not arguing with anybody who scored it for Spinks.

The second fight was a bad decision, similar to Briggs - Foreman.I have a hard time seeing how one can score that to Spinks.

 

I would say the 80-81 period could have been Holmes' wheelhouse of prime. But Michael wasn't HW at the time.
LH Spinks vs. Holmes 80-81? Stoppage.
HW Spinks vs. Holmes 80-81? Stoppage, tho a bit later.
IMO Gregory would have beaten Spinks in their first fight had Eddie not had to shed major pounds just prior!
Spinks belongs on a short list of ATG LH's but, IMO, those that place him at THE top AT are stretching things.

 

Holmes by decision.

 

I wouldnt rank Spinks above Holmes at heavyweight. But I do believe Spinks would give him a lot of problems simply because Holmes wasn't the most creative nor intelligent boxer. Eddie Gregory had a much higher ring iq than Larry and therefore was able to outthink Spinks at times. Prime Holmes beats Spinks mostly through size. If they were closer in size Spinks would have handily dealt with him