Revisiting Holmes-Spinks l and ll

Holmes looked very stiff in the first one, took Spinks lightly, didn't train much and according to himself was injured, which allowed for Spinks to put on, in my opinion, a boxing masterclass. In the second Holmes looked better than he looked in 2 years, but somehow Spinks managed to weather the early storm and box well enough, to get the decision. A tale of two fights really.

 

Spinks shaded the first fight in my opinion. Holmes faded near the end of the second bout but had done enough early on to win the fight.

 

Here's what I just wrote up in the "What Fights Did You Watch Today" thread.....

Michael Spinks W15 Larry Holmes (2)

I have seen this fight, and had the impression (while not scoring it at the time) that the consensus was right; Larry got jobbed. His mouthy response to losing his title in '85 came back to bite him, and the "boxing establishment" as Larry liked to call it claimed another victim. Having now scored it, I'm left with a different opinion.

I did have Holmes winning, but just barely. This was a close fight. Holmes started beautifully, walking Spinks down and bullying him early. That impressive start didn't last more than four or five rounds though. He couldn't sustain it. Spinks is one of my favorite fighters. He creates on the fly, reinventing himself sometimes within the time frame of a minute or two depending on the need. Ever so gradually, he wormed his way back into the fight and left doubt in at least my mind as to just how unfair this decision was.

I've rarely seen a fighter play with the gray areas as well as Spinks. He commands the vacuum in a bout, filling in blanks here and there to take the play away and reset his command of the occasion. Because he got off to such a rocky start, he had a lot of ground to cover here, but on my card he damn near did it. he didn't throw as many punches the second time around, and Holmes rebounded with a good round here and there late to pad the early lead, but I'm taken by the fact that while I had Holmes hanging on and winning, it was still Michael Spinks that left the impression. I don't see this as a robbery. Others will disagree, and that's fine. Holmes could have done more, but his slower, aged body couldn't sustain the attack long enough to make it truly conclusive.

1. Holmes
2. Holmes
3. Holmes
4. Holmes
5. Spinks
6. Spinks
7. Holmes
8. Spinks (finding a home for the hook, a punch Larry was not supposed to be vulnerable to)
9. Even
10. Spinks
11. Even
12. Holmes
13. Spinks
14. Holmes (had to give him credit for nearly having Spinks down, though Michael landed more punches)
15. Spinks

144-143 Holmes.

 

double like

 

Can’t find my scoring of the first fight, but I had Spinks by one or two points iirc (I know I had Spinks, just not 100% on what the score was).

Second fight, I had Holmes 144-141 and can’t see how a judge could get to a win for Spinks.