I was wondering when somebody would point this out. The first knockdown was certainly no reflection on his chin. Which underscores the importance of Tyson's speed. If size and power alone were sufficient to take out Mike Spinks, then Cooney would have prevailed. No, he wasn't right for Tyson. I'm not suggesting Spinks might have won if he was, but I at least expected him to try executing the same strategy he used against Qawi. Certainly his lateral movement could have gotten him out of round one. Tyson/Spinks was Liston/Patterson alll over again. As highly as I regard Holmes, I do agree that he has gotten something of a free ride in the area of punching power. His arms and hands did not seem capable of withstanding much hard striking. There are few individually memorable punches in his career. The right hand which knocked out Evangelista, the first jab which floored Ocasio for a nine count, the uppercut which decked Weaver, the right which dropped Marvis Frazier, and the right which eliminated Weaver in their geriatric rematch. (I realize how old they were then, but Larry's cross was still a thing of beauty, nonetheless.) It has been commonly supposed that Larry hit harder than Ali, but I'm not entirely sold on this. The Holmes jab was definitely harder. However, Muhammad's left hook knockdown of Folley (which turned that match around in the fourth), right cross knockout of Zora, his wrecking ball hook on Ringo, the 15 second knockdown with an early right cross on Blue Lewis, the knockout of Foreman, the bombs he drove Frazier to the ropes with in the second round of their middle fight (until Tony Perez rescued Joe), and even the selective force of the showboating bolo punch which finished off Dunn for his final stoppage win, suggest to me that Ali's punching power may have been superior to Larry's, when Muhammad chose to use it. (Ali also visibly wobbled Norton during their middle bout, in a way that Holmes didn't obviously succeed at doing during their classic.) To me, Ali's hook on Bonavena and knockout of Foreman trump any single power punch knockdown Holmes produced during competition.
In theory, Spinks had the ability to give Tyson a good fight for a few rounds. But it simply didn't happen. If Spinks had fought him in 1986 before he had ripped the guts out of the division, perhaps we would have seen a better fight, simply for the fact that Spinks may have had more hunger and confidence, less fear and anxiety, a younger body and not as mentally close to retirement. But Butch Lewis pulled a master stroke, upping the money available to Michael to 13 million, PLUS whatever he got for facing Cooney (5 ? 10 ?). I always admired that, the way he wasn't pushed around by King or Tyson's camp, or the IBF, or HBO, and ultimately did what was best for his fighter. I absolutely agree that Tyson's speed was the essence of his heavyweight superiority over Spinks. Bigger, stronger, equally hard-punching heavyweights would not have done as much to Spinks. I read an interview with Ken Norton where he says Ali was a harder puncher AND stronger than Larry Holmes. I think Ali could bang when he wanted to, he could really explode into a punch. All those you mention, and the right hand that sent Ron Lyle reeling, and some of those he hit Cleveland Williams with, VERY HARD explosive shots. But Ali goofed around a bit and often threw punches that had nothing on them, especially as he got older and flat-footed, he could overwhelm lesser men with those wide flurries of uppercuts, but they were "arm punches" really, and it was just his sheer speed and reach, and the volume of shots and the resulting intimidation that had those guys backing up and surrendering. Holmes was more consistent, when he put shots together they were a damn sight better than some of the flicks that Ali included in his flurries, but his top end power shot didn't match Ali's, IMO.
Spinks was never going to blow wind up Tyson's arse. He didn't have the size and strength (and lets just live another day attitude) to spoil his offense like a Tucker or Bonecrusher and hindsight tells us Spinks did not have the power to turn this fight. Alley this to the fact Tyson was actually the faster man and Spinks is a goner every single time. IMO peak Tyson is the supreme killer of those pesky 175 pounders. He is the anti christ of the Tunney's, Charles, Spinks, Conn's etc i reckon. Peak Holmes and Ali would be hard on them too due to sheer speed and endurance, but not with the same dynamicism as Tyson.
Spinks didn't like it too much when Tyson's fist came through the dressing wall during pre-fight warmups.
I actually thought he punched the hole in the wall pre Holmes and his fist didn't really come thru the other side. Could be wrong tho.
I heard Holmes crapped his pants afterwards.... Now we know what brought about the Toad's favourite clip, John Where is the hypnotoad anyway? I'd love to take a poke at those eyes lol
Tyson would have always beat Spinks, by knockout. But Spinks' performance has "could have done better" written all over it.
Spinks would knockout Tommy in the 11th. Equal, if not better power, and a stronger chin, which would see him through any problems Hearns caused.
p4p Hearns who beat Duran? I give Hearns a good chance to knock out Spinks. Hearns had the jab and a sneaky right and Spinks went the distance with Murray Sutherland whom Hearns went 10 rounds with also.
yeah but he went the distance with him once, and Tommy easily beat Sutherland. Tommy was a fast puncher. And Tommy was going to move up and fight Spinks had he beaten Hagler.
Obviously nobody read his post. He asked who the better fighter was P4P, not who wins at 175. In any case, to answer his question... Spinks was a better fighter than Tommy, even P4P. Spinks was smarter, more versatile, way more durable, better defensively, and had much better stamina.