Michael Spinks

While I agree that Yaqui Lopez was a bit past it (and while Lopez was good and exciting he never could beat the best fighters he faced), his fights with Qawi and Muhammad took place when both guys were still in their primes. Eddie could be a headcase but that wasnt Spinks' fault. Spinks did what he had to do and even gave Muhammad a rematch which didnt come off because Muhammad flipped out at the last second and wouldnt go through with it. Im not even convinced that Marvin Johnson was past his prime when Spinks obliterated him. Spinks was definately special.

 

I agree with this point wholehearedly. Carefully examine Spinks record and you'll see that his best opponents prior to winning the light heavyweight title were Marvin Johnson and Yaqui Lopez, fighters who had been ko'd numerous times - Saad had already ko'd both guys TWICE. And, Johnson had already been ko'd by Mustafa Muhammad. Spinks best wins overalll at LH were the decisions over Mustafa and Qwai. These two fights were very good wins, but hardly dominant. He won by about 144-140 in each. His list of victims as titleist were pretty weak. And he won a very, very close decision over Eddie Davis, despite what two of the judges said. Davis was probably his best challenger, other than, of course, Qwai in the unification fight. The think the fact that he unified the title and never lost at LH gives some the impression that the was better than he was. Don't get me wrong, he was very good, but not as great as some believe.

 

His victories over Qawi and Muhammad were far more dominant than the scores indicate. In both fights he had things well in hand. In fact its the ONLY fight Ive seen Qawi in where he looked downright clueless.

 

While I somewhat agree with your overall sentiment, boza, I have to agree with klompton on the Qawi/Gregory fights. He out-boxed Qawi cleanly throughout in a technical masterclass, and handily won the last 2/3 of the Gregory fight after his usual slow start.

 

Just because a fighter gets knocked out doesn't mean they are past it. Johnson just didn't have the best chin.

 

I think Spinks is being seriously underrated here. He is easily one of the ten greatest light-heavyweights ever and no heavyweight in the past 20 years is as good as him, RJJ included. Spinks competition was very good, not as good as say Ezzard Charles but better than say Bob Foster.

 

Spinks fought some top tier fighters, and even though Charles fought better competition, I'd have Mike as the top LH ever. His will to win was stronger than Ezzard.

 

i probably rank the best light-heavies like this:

1.Charles
2.Langford
3.Moore
4.Tunney
5.Spinks
6.Conn
7.Foster

Terrefic group of fighters

 

Nothing wrong with Marv's beard mate..very solid. It was his lack of defence and the fact he threw everything he had into winning, that saw him stopped most of those times. His body was probably more of a liability and it took some to chop him down.

 

Johnson never looked the same force after the drawn out beating against Eddie imo.that he went on for a while and had reasonable success was more down to the drop off in talent in the division i'd say.

That said, he was still a solid fighter when Spinks beat him and fell away another few notches after that brutality..a good upcoming talent defeats battleworn but still dangerous contender type fight.Same with Lopez(who at his best was as good as any of the recent mexican american\mexican p4p'ers, just not quite as good as the top men in his own era and division.

 

How exactly do you quantify something like that?

 

I agree. Johnson would go on to win the title again (and actually defend it this time(!) six full years after Spinks beat him. By no means was he washed up.