Micheal Spinks Vs Tommy Morrison

A body shot dropped Spinks early. Spinks was Tyson's easiest fight!

He's a blown up light heavy who cherry picked his way to success during a changing of the guard. If Holmes hurt Spinks at his age, Morrison demolishes him. Bob Foster who hit harder than Spinks had little power at heavy, and major chin issues...as Spinks would had he fought on vs live bodies who were ranked at heavyweight.

Yeah Carl Williams, who was much taller, longer, had an all time jab, and more power than Spinks gave Morrison trouble. Spinks did not have that build or weaponry with his jab....vs heavyweights so its unlikely he could have a similar attack plan.

 

Actually the Marvis Frazier fight along with several of his early prospect showings could all qualify as being easier affairs, but none of this negates my statement about Spinks laying down or being past his best or Tyson being leagues better than Morrison.

Ummm. What?? He won the olympic gold medal..He dominated a very competitive light heavyweight division which contained a few hall of fame men in their primes.. He fought for and won the heavyweight title in his very first outing at heavyweight - something no one had done before or has done since. Christ Morrison was already 24-0 before his people even chanced putting him in with a ring worn James Tillis.

This was Spinks' first outting at heavyweight against the reigning world champion and an ATG.. Larry staggered Spinks by landing stretegically placed right hands and jabs, and not wild left hooks when it was convenient to do so.

Perhaps.. But the "live bodies" I was thinking of were more along the lines of Tim Witherspoon, Evander Holyfield and Frank Bruno... Not Tommy Morrison who is a cut or two below that bunch.

And who was also far more prone to left hooks than was Spinks. Morrison had a declining opponent in front of him who's biggest weakness matched his best asset and still he got in serious trouble. Doesn't make for a great argument.

He wouldn't need it.. He was awkward as hell with a lethal right hand and was dangerous in both the early and late stages of a fight. Morrison who got Careless against Mercer and sparked in one by Bentt, then struggled mightily with an 8-8 Ross Purity and washed up Truth isn't figuring him out...

 

Magoo,

I have little doubt Spinks was an ATG at light heavyweight. He's out of AAA ball here, and at best a singles hitter in the heavyweight division.

I'll stand by Spinks faced Holmes are the perfect time ( Pressure was on Holmes to break Marciano's record, and should be 1-1 vs an older Holmes )

In a fair world Spinks record at heavy is 3-2. And he knew better than to fight on vs. a live body ranked in the top ten after Tyson took care of him in 91 seconds.

Two of Spinks wins @ heavy were vs older or inactive fighters. The other vs a guy who wasn't ranked in a title defense.

If Spinks had 40+ fights at heavyweight as Morrison did, he's getting knocked out too. Conversely is Morrison fought as a light heavyweight t 220, he's cleaning house.

The 1984 ring magazine annual ratings were thus:

Larry Holmes, Champion
Pinklon Thomas
Greg Page
David Bey
Tim Witherspoon
Gerrie Coetzee
Mike Weaver
Michael Dokes
James Broad
James (Bonecrusher) Smith
Gerry C00neyey ( Spinks beat him in 1987 when C00ney was unranked )

Had Spinks beaten any of these guys in 1984-1985, then you could say he would be worthy of meeting Holmes in 1985. But Spinks vaulted to Holmes without beating one ranked heavyweight! He beat some obscure 16-0 light heavy, then took the Holmes fight

Morrison did get careless vs Mercer, but Mercer took a heck of a shot. After that fight, Morrison worked on his stamina.

I agree Spinks had a decent right hand. And the quickest way to catch a left hook is to throw the right hand often so Spinks would need to be judicious on this punch, I think.

 

We can talk all we want about how unproven Spinks was at heavyweight. But that doesn't change the fact that even that 1985 Holmes was likely a better win than any Morrison ever acquired and nor does it change the fact that Morrison was either beaten or given hell to by journeyman level opponents. You seem sold on Morrison winning so run with it.. I'm favoring Spinks.

 

Completely different fight!

Holmes who wasn't one for making excuses fought with a bad disk in his back in the first match, which prevented him from being aggressive.

As mentioned the majority of boxing fans and perhaps the judges and Don King and Butch Lewis ( Lewis was a Spinks guy, King wanted a new champ, not an old one ) wanted Spinks to win.

The first fight was close, and likely decided in the 15th round which Spinks won cleanly. At the time I felt Spinks won via narrow margin.

Its been a while since I watched it. The first fight was close. While all three judges had it for Spinks ( 145-142 ), the AP And UPI did not.

Unofficial AP scorecard: 144-141 Holmes

Unofficial UPI scorecard: 146-141 Holmes

In the re-match Holmes had no back issues and hurt Spinks with right hands winning it cleanly only to be robbed.

Morrison isn't going to fight hurt or apprehensive as Holmes did in the first match. Quite the opposite. He's going to press it and land. I just view Spinks as a un-tested heavyweight, and one who was blown out in his only true test.

 

spinks would destroy Morrison, like watching wlad being destroyed by journeymen.

 

Spinks easily KOed Stephan Tangstad who drew with a young Buster Douglas.

 

This Morrison worship is fuucking ridiculous. He was a tightrope walker who got wobbled a hundred times in his career.

I hate to break the news but Tommy couldn't box very well. He performed like a guy who had learned his moves from a video game... head movement here and there whether needed or not, throw (and grunt) punches in certain pre-programmed combos regardless of the position of his opponent, gassing himself out on useless punches... He just wasn't that good. He never KO'd anyone near Spinks' league and he could have fought for 100 years and never done so.

"Style wise he was much like Tyson, and although PERHAPS not as good"... Are you smoking crack? PERHAPS? Firstly, he was nowhere as fluid or responsive to his opponent. He was a mannequin pantomiming boxing moves, completely wooden and predictable. He was nothing like Tyson and not in the same universe in terms of talent or skill.

They haven't invented the era when this guy would have succeeded. He was a fraud, plain and simple.

 

And what did Morrison do in HIS first true test? His managers padded his record through 28 pro fights before finally taking on a 31 year man with 17 pro bouts who struggled life and death with Bert Cooper and Francesco Damiani... The result ? Morrison gets hammered.. Are you really going to compare Spinks' SOLE defeat to a prime Tyson to Morrison's getting beat by Mercer, Bentt and draw to purity?

 

While I agree with some of your criticisms, calling him a "fraud" is a bit harsh.. Yeah he was over hyped and sure his record had some padding. But it wasn't like he fought in fixed matches or feasted exclusively on 0-10 tomato cans. He fought in over 50 pro fights and against a few good heavyweights, even rose off the canvas to win some fights and battled through a broken jaw to beat one of those opponents. Overall his career wasn't bad.. At his pinnacle he was at least a fringe level contender worthy of a lower top 10 rating... Not exactly the stuff that ATG's are made of, but hardly a fraud.

 

I usually agree with Seamus. He can be a truth machine at times, but in this case he's off.

Morrison fought in perhaps the most talented time line in heavyweight boxing. Do you agree or disagree with this opening statement?

Yes he lost to Mercer, Bentt ( who was a very good amatuer ), and Lewis. Spinks would get killed vs the same Mercer and Lewis, and if Spinks had 52 matches at heavyweight, he would have more than one KO loss to opponents on Bentt's level. I'd guarantee that

Morrison took blows from Foreman, Ruddock and Hipp, who hit much harder than Spinks and defeated them. A fraud would not be able to do this.

Come on Seamus, when a puncher is in there with a smaller man who can't hurt him, he tee's off on him. Spinks would not be able to take it and Morrison hit every bit as hard as Tyson, perhaps even harder with his hook to the body or the head.

Bob Foster who was a top 6 ATG at light heavyweight and perhaps the best puncher at 175 pounds did poorly at heavyweight. Foster said the heavyweight jab felt like the light heavyweight knockout punch. Call Foster chinny at heavyweight and I'll agree, but he had zero chin problems at light heavyweight.

 

Spinks would probably beat Mercer and Foster was way easier to hit than Spinks.

 

1. Are we assuming that this is Spinks if he were a "natural" heavyweight. Or are we charging him with the unfair task of moving him up from his light heavyweight form at age 29 then having him fight through 52 heavyweight fights to about the age of 40 something?

2. That's a pretty bold thing to Guarantee. That an ATG would have multiple KO losses to a fighter on Michael Bentt's level.

 

I agree that Morrison was no fraud. and those were some decent wins. But Joe Hipp was not that hard of a hitter and at his best was fringe level.. Morrison fought life and death and barely survived that bout. Ruddock had fought all but once against a journeyman level opponent whom he decisioned within a 3 year period prior to facing Morrison and may even have been the victim of an early stoppage. I'll give you the Foreman fight, but Tommy wouldn't fight Spinks the same way that he approached the Foreman bout.