Tyson-Spinks was a great performance by any HW champ

Slowing down? Pretty lame excuse if you ask me. He was a 32 year old heavyweight facing a 39 year old lightheavyweight, and he got decked!

 

32, with a bad back. You can see the slide in the Cockell fight, fought a few months early. He hand speed in both fights were real slow. compare to his hand speed vs Walcott and Charles.

 

He got decked and near beaten half to death by a 37 year old Walcott to. Charles who was a former middleweight and well into his 30's, gave him fits as well.

What's your excuse for them?

 

All those light-heavyweights were GOOD OPPONENTS at heavyweight. They were damn good heavyweights.

Michael Spinks was actually the heavyweight champion of the world.

It's wrong to build up the likes of Conn & Moore and dismiss Spinks at the same time.
Having said that, it's wrong to assume Tyson could KO1 all of them.

 

I think that's an exaggeration.
The first 12 rounds of Walcott-Marciano dont look anywhere near as one-sided as some people make out.
In fact, I've seen 11 of them, and have Marciano winning 4 or 5.
The judges scorecards had Rocky needing a KO to win, but capable of getting a draw. And I think the fight was arguably closer than the judges had it.
It's a far cry from Marciano taking a one-sided beating, as is often claimed.

 

when the fight ended one line by Spinks summed Mike Spinks state of mind up exactly.. He stated to Ray leonard in the post fight interview..

"Firstly i want to enjoy the fact that the fight is over..."

He must have been dreading it like the plague.. He looked drained as he entered the ring.. the vain in his neck was pumping like a motha..

 

Probably the most significant win of Tyson's career, even though Spinks was a natural light-heavyweight.

 

or to make complement his physical talent. THIS was his single greatest problem. if he had the ring intellect of someone like evander holyfield - o man - he'd have been the greatest of all time. but obviously then, that wouldn't BE tyson. with proper ring intellect - his physical abilities had little limitation IMO. yes, i agree with your post overall too. totally different test with someone like foreman.

 

No excuse, they were great fighters. Why dont you call out Joe Louis and ask him why he let Billy Conn and Tommy Farr give him hard fights. Or ask Larry Holmes why he had life and death stuggles with 15-0 fighters??

 

Why dont you call out Joe Louis and ask him why he let Billy Conn and Tommy Farr give him hard fights.

I certainly will.

While I'm at it, I'll also ask him why he gave 54-41-9 Jack Roper a title shot. There are more than enough viable questions to ask Louis. :good

 

The premise of the post with Conn, Moore, Moorer and Tunney was to dismiss the notion that just because Spinks was a light heavyweight that Mike shoudnt get that much credit for it when in fact Spinks (like Conn, Tunney, Moore and Moorer) was a formidable fighter at HW. Tyson's destruction of Spinks has more to do with Tyson's ability than Spinks's inability.

 

I agree with that. :good

 

Man Spinks did it only for the money... He knew he had no chanche.

 

I think it was a combination of elements. I won't take any credit away from Tyson for his performance. He was in the peak of his prime, and a well developed champion worthy of all time great status. His performance that evening was remarkable. We have to consider however, that Spinks had only fought maybe one time within a two year period, or fairly close ( 21 months ). His most recent outing was a year earlier against a more or less shot Cooney. His lack of interest in the heavyweight title became evident in 1987, when he backed out of the IBF heavyweight elimination tournament for the bigger pay day with Gerry.

In the months leading up to the fight, he showed little or no enthusiasm during the press conferences or intereviews. I read an article in sport illustrated magazine in the spring of 1988, that featured a piece on Spinks and his preparation for Tyson. He illuded to the fact that his young daughter was scared to see her father enter the ring with Tyson. Come fight night, when the opening bell rang, we saw little or nothing from Spinks that resembled the kind of aggressive attack, or tenacity that was seen in the Holmes, Qawi, and Johnson fights of years earlier.

I don't believe that Spinks was petrafied of Tyson as most so often claim. Rather, I think he was a smart champion who saw the writing on the wall, and new his days were at an end. What's more, he realized that Evander Holyfield would be entering the division in the coming months, as well as a fresh crop of young olympians from the class of 88' looking to prove themselves. The heavyweight picture no longer had a place for the Jinx. It was a good time to get out. I make no claims about Spinks having much of a chance against Mike even if he had shown up ready to take on the world. I do feel strongly however, that had he wanted to prove himself to all of us, the way he did against Qawi and Holmes, there's no way in hell that fight was going to be over in 91 seconds....


.......The End......

 

And who did Liston beat that was so good? He gets over rated more than Tyson because of the way he beat his oppontants. Tyson has a much better resume than Liston.