Rank them: Spinks,Jones,Loughran,Tiger,Conn and Foster

Conn did more good work at the weight than Spinks for me.So did Galindez imo, but that's another matter.

Spinks and Conn are tough fighters to judge imo.Ugly, unorthodox fighters both.

I think i'd rate Spinks higher if he hadn't looked so flawed agaisnt Davis( good fighter though he is).You have to make your performances against good dighters count when you are angling for all-time greatness with a low number of fights.A lot of emphasis goes on the Qawi and Gregory wins for Michael, and rightly so, as those were his key defining fights...but the Davis performance hasn't been scrutinised enough imo.

I tend to see Spinks being hell for even the very best of the more aggressive slugging/pressuring light heavies, but don't rate him as highly against the real A level boxer-punchers throughout the divisions history as others seem to.

A skilled mobile fighter, executing a disciplined peformance is going to give that bad footwork all sorts of issues.

 

How on earth can you say that? Just because Louis struggled with Conn? Doesn't mean he'd beat the other Heavies. His power was ordinary in his own division, let alone at Heavyweight. Louis one drama was heavy feet, and against the superbly boxing Conn that was a liability until late in the fight when he finally got him.

Conn's a fantastic fighter, and many don't actually realise his light heavyweight achievements. I agree with McGrain that he's underrated on this board, but he's also correct in keeping things to what he actually did instead of speculating too much.

 

You think he would have Janitor. It's another thing to actually do it. Conn's anything but proven at heavyweight despite "nearly" beating Joe Louis.

 

Where Conn kicked off tho has no bearing (obviously if he went on a title tear in other divisions that would be a different story) on getting him ahead of Spinks. He was just a kid of around 17 when he started while Spinks was 21. Almost all real achievements (granted he has at least one fine win under) started in the 175's.

 

He's a great fighter, no doubt whatsoever. I like Spinks H2H personally but to each his own when greats meet.

 

I like Spinks work myself. Qawi and Mustafa get him a lot of milage with me.

And agreed, they are pretty unorthodox tho Eddie Futch would debate you as he says Conn was beautiful in the ring.

The Davis performance was ordinary, but they are all allowed an off night. Pretty much everyone had one and whether we see it as a great coming out of fraility or simply an off night is up to our own interpretation. He beat far better fighters than Davis and he beat fighters that beat Davis. How did you score that one? It was close. Personally i believe Spinks took Davis for granted and looked past him, the Qawi rematch was already sealed and indeed he was there at ringside making plenty of noise.

I like Spinks to hold his own across history. Eddie Futch is an enormous asset and i believe he'd find ways to counter the movers. Futch was extraordinary when it came to gameplans, and Spinks was great at following them. Except once. But that's an entirely different matter.

Incidentally i like Spinks over Conn because i simply don't believe Conn had the power to gain enough respect once Spinks revved up. It would be a race to the finish line but Spinks could throw caution to the wind thoughout.

 

Light Heavyweight is Conn's famous place tho and he never won a title anywhere else. It's where his roots are.

Spinks actually moved up to heavyweight with the knowledge he was never coming back and packed on the weight accordingly and intentionally. Conn never did this.

If you look at them at 21 again you will find they weigh basically exactly the same. Conn had filled out by this time.

 

Lets not forgett that only six months later, Louis turned Buddy Baer into a pile of jelly in the first round with a single combination/mistake/opportunity.

Many Louis students consider that his finest performence on film.