Spinks Vs Moorer at Light Heavyweight and/or Heavyweight

Spinks KO and Spinks KO.

 

At Heavyweight, Spinks would pick the lackadaisacal Moorer apart and stop him in the late rounds. Moorer at light heavyweight was more agressive. Unfortunately this might lead to Moorer being stopped even sooner when Spinks counters him.

 

Great fighter beats very good fighter at both weights. I have Spinks on top at 175 and 200 +. Moorer is a hell of a lot more dangerous than he gets credit for though.

Spinks was such a versatile fighter. Too bad his knees and will were shot when he fought Tyson.

 

Idk may go against the grain and pick Moorer. I don’t see Spinks as being great but both are damn good.

 

What?

 

Moorer was more hype than substance at 175; Spinks would play with him.

At Heavyweight Moorer has the potential to get the job done, but does he have the discipline to keep to game plan and despite having heavier hands, avoid going to war with the faster Spinks? Probably not, and thus I think the jinx would strike in the late rounds.

 

Spinks was better but Moorer had a good center of gravity and he hit hard with his feet on the ground flat. Spinks would stop him late.

 

Do you consider him top 20?

 

Of all time? No.
At LHW? Yeah, absolutely.

 

I def agree with that.

 

So how is he not great? He's a staple of a LHW top 10. And is top 50 pfp, I don't understand how you wouldn't consider him to be great

 

Not my argument but my two pence:

Greatness is an abstract concept, and personally I consider it the absolute complement, thus it should only be anointed on the special few. Around thirty fighters IMO, and thus Spinks merely qualifies as a rather superb fighter.

But as I suggest, there can be no definitive right or wrong answers.

 

Sorry. Should have said as a HW. Doesn’t mean I don’t think he’s an amazing fighter just not a world beater. He’s def top 50. But I guess it depends how u view the term great.