Michael Spinks vs the Klitschkos

Michael Spinks was wearing knee support as early as 1980, and I think coming in at a higher weight was a calculated move. Cooney was the biggest fighter he ever faced in his career, and Tyson was by far the most powerful and destructive. I don't see much if any differences at all from the Spinks that fought Holmes to the one who devastated Gerry Cooney. He rarely got hit in that fight, and actually looked very good, it should be said. Perhaps his love for the sport had diminished somewhat, that's purely speculation, but I don't see any deterioration in the performances themselves. Tyson blasts out any version of Spinks at Heavyweight.

 

The same could be said of Valuev though

 

True, I just looked at his fight with Lopez on youtube from 1981, and he does have a pad on his right knee... He did however, have them on both knees against Tyson.

I think that he looked his best in the Holmes fights, where is weight ranged from 199-205.. Against Tyson, he was 212, which made him look a bit deconditioned.

Yes, but he was a man who had boxed all but 1 round in 3 years, was out of shape at 238 lbs, and known for having very recent battles with alcohol.. Cooney looked like **** in that fight, and well Spinks dispatched him accordingly, he got tagged more often than some would've expected..

I think the difference was subtle, but definitely there.. It was more pronounced a year later in the Tyson fight. There are few that I've ever heard claim that Spinks was prime by that point.

He got tagged plenty, was behind on the score cards at one point, and even missed a few shots against a mostly imobile target...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysMabpknftE[/ame]

Judging by the look on Spink's face, he clearly did not want to be in that ring with Tyson.

There's not much to go by... In 1987, he polished off a total has been, who had long fallen out of the ratings, and in 1988, he lasted 91 seconds against the last man he ever faced.

Yes, but my ascertion is that Bert Cooper could have stood a chance against the one who fought from 1987-1988, and if not 1987, then surely 1988... That's all I'm saying.... If you want to believe that in June of 1988, Spinks would have easily blasted out the same Cooper who gave Evander Holyfield a scare in 1991, and left Ray Mercer's face looking like a basketball, then you're entitled to your opinion...

 

Okay fair enough.

 

Perhaps, but I think he purposefully came in at 212 because he didn't want to be overpowered, not because he was getting lazy and unmotivated.

Really? I thought Cooney went into that fight with a lot of people thinking he was going to win in devastating fashion? It was a pick 'em fight.

I think Spinks ceased being prime the moment he moved up to Heavyweight. A fighter in his prime is operating at his most effective weight, and Spinks was clearly not doing that fighting against opposition who often dwarfed him. I just don't see any deterioration in that year period from 1985 to 1986. What do we have to go on in the Tyson fight? He wasn't allowed to show anything, and Tyson had done that to legitimate Heavyweights.

An immobile target that dwarfed him and hit like a freight train.

You'd see the same expression on a 1985 Spinks.

I think Cooper could have stood a chance against any Spinks that competed at Heavyweight. This is my point. I don't think there was any great decline from Spinks from 1985-1987. The opponents got better and bigger for most part.

 

Cooper was probably a wee bit faster than the cromagnon man.

 

I really dont understand how anyone (and nearly everyone does) can draw any conclusion whatsoever from the Tyson fight. Arguably the greatest fighter ever, nailed him clean and hard and KOd him. It is as simple as that.

Tyson nailed plenty of others with very good chins, in exactly the same way and it was also over. Holmes, Berbick, Witherspoon are just three examples who were dropped in exactly the same way. They are good chins but when hit clean by Tyson, it was over. The same goes for Spinks. Personally i doubt many if any other fighters would hit with the same type of blow and the fight means absolutely nothing. Tyson was quicker than Spinks, which is why he landed before Spinks managed to hit his big right hand (from memory) and from there it was over. There is no way the same thing is going to happen against any other fighter in history. Except maybe Joe Louis, Dempsey or Bob Fitzsimmons but i would doubt those three even.

Spinks is largely unproven at heavy, so he must start underdog agaisnt both Klitchskos, but I think he is a very live underdog and it would be a great fight. I think he actually decisions Vitali, and if Wlad isnt careful, i wouldnt be totally surprised to see the Jinx land late and him win by KO.

By the way, it isnt well known, but Spinks actually retired after the Cooney fight and he had to be enticed out of retirement to face Tyson. His desire had pretty much gone by the time of this fight and while i am sure that he trained hard, desire is important.

 

This:deal.

 

I confidently rate 42 year old Holmes as superior to any fighter that either Klitschko has beaten.

 

Even The Tiger? :blood

This content is protected

Look at his ****in dome!

 

Indeed, even The Tiger & his magnificant chrome dome.

The Dragon & his superficial muscle too for that matter.

This content is protected

Intimidating or what?! :scaredas:

 

K2 are destroyers.

This content is protected

 

Well neither Klit has faced Sugar Nikolay Valuev, so I'd say that your assertion is true....

 

Why is removing watermarks harder than this & the Foreman edits?

 

Because with the Foreman edits and this, I'm only really adding something and that's as easy and dragging and dropping. To actually take something away from the image itself, you'd have to take it off and then fill in the background to make it appear like nothing was ever there in the first place...it's very hard, and way above my station.