Michael Spinks vs Tony Tucker

I do think its a shame that Spinks did not take this match. Sure, Tucker does not provide much value as a scalp in hindsite, and looking at their styles, it probably would have been a less than crowd pleasing fight..But had Michael accepted the challenge and beaten him, it would have eliminated the scar of being stripped of a title.. It also would have looked good that a former light heayweight defeated a prime 6'5, 225 lbs man in his prime with a 34-0 record going in.. After that, I wouldn't have had a problem with him taking an easier fight for a big pay check such as Cooney or someone similar.. But in 1987, I would have preferred that Spinks had done more to maintain his true standing as "the champ."

On a sidenote, I don't think that it would be unreasonable to favor Tucker in this fight.. I think Spink's interest in the game as well as some of his abilities had diminished after the Holmes fight, and in truth, he was probably never terribly well fit for the division in the first place... I was not very impressed in the opening rounds of his fight with Stephen Tangstad. He was very slow to get started, and was even allowing Tangstad to get some shots off on him.. Tucker was no go-getter, but he was big, strong, durable, young, active fighting, and could hit a man with both hands.. This might be a bad chemistry for an aging champion who hadn't spent much time in the heavyweight division, and as far as he was concerned, had no further mountains to climb....