More complete fighter: Ezzard Charles or Michael Spinks

No man ever beat Speaks at light heavyweight no matter what style. Box or punch Spinks was the complete fighter at that weight

 

This might be the first MS thread I've seen on Classic that actually flatters MS. It's almost always the other way around, for my judgment.

 

Charles gets the edge. A longer career with more impressive wins.

 

Charles for sure, he could fight at almost any range, was a counter punched, inside fighter, had flexible defense, could crack and throw combinations when he wanted to, good head movement and great ring IQ, threw a wide variety of punches, etc.

Spinx was great, but more a of a technician and wasn't as versatile as Charles. I'd say Spinx was arguably better at long range with his jab and tended to be more responsible/professional on defense sticking to a game plan.

 

Charles for sure, he could fight at almost any range, was a counter punched, inside fighter, had flexible defense, could crack and throw combinations when he wanted to, good head movement and great ring IQ, threw a wide variety of punches, etc.

Spinx was great, but more a of a technician and wasn't as versatile as Charles. I'd say Spinx was arguably better at long range with his jab and tended to be more responsible/professional on defense sticking to a game plan.