What if M.Spinks had stayed at lhw in '85 then fought Holyfield at cruiser in '86-7?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by DINAMITA, Jan 26, 2009.


  1. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    Michael Spinks weighed in at 175lbs when he knocked out Jim MacDonald in 8 rounds in June 1985 in a defence of his undisputed light-heavyweight world title.

    He then moved up to heavyweight to challenge champion Larry Holmes in September 1985, weighing in at just under 200lbs. Spinks won a unanimous decision over 15 rounds to win the IBF title. Spinks relinquished his light-heavyweight belts after this fight and fought out his remaining bouts at heavyweight before retiring in 1988 at the age of 32.

    ________________________________________________________________

    Evander Holyfield won the WBA cruiserweight title by beating Dwight Muhammad Qawi on a split decision over 15 rounds in July 1986. He weighed in at 186lbs for the fight.

    He fought at cruiserweight for another 2 years before moving up to heavyweight to fight James Tillis in July 1988. Holyfield weighed in at 202lbs and won when Tillis retired in the 5th round.

    ________________________________________________________________


    If Spinks had not moved up to heavyweight in 1985, he would've still been lightheavyweight champion when Holyfield won the cruiserweight title in 1986.

    Had Spinks moved up to challenge Holyfield at 190lbs in 1986-7, who would've won and why??

    :bbb
     
    DINAMITA, Jan 26, 2009
    DINAMITA, Jan 26, 2009
    #1
  2. Sister Sledge

    Sister Sledge Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,129
    27
    Jul 24, 2004
    I mistakenly voted for Holyfield. I think Spinks would have won. Holy was still inexperienced when he fought Qawi. I think he would have been too much for Holy at the time in 86-87. Spinks was a pretty paient fighter, while Evander was pretty aggressive. Evander was always easy to hit and I just think he would have walked into too many jinxes. It would have been a great fight. But Spinks just would have exposed what Holyfield needed to work on, defense.
     
    Sister Sledge, Jan 26, 2009
    Sister Sledge, Jan 26, 2009
    #2
  3. WhataRock

    WhataRock Loyal Member Full Member

    34,843
    17,972
    Jul 29, 2004
    Im very confident at that stage Spinks would have won a pretty clear decision..Any later it begins to tip further in Holy's favour.
     
    WhataRock, Jan 26, 2009
    WhataRock, Jan 26, 2009
    #3
  4. p.Townend

    p.Townend Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,400
    4
    Jan 14, 2009
    He would have been better of doing this on a career level but not financialy.I think Spinks would have won by desicion and that Holyfield would still go on to achive all that he did.
     
    p.Townend, Jan 26, 2009
    p.Townend, Jan 26, 2009
    #4
  5. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    50,942
    24,876
    Jan 3, 2007
    A well seasoned, yet still somewhat young Spinks around age 29, would have my vote to narrowly decision a 13-0 Holyfield. Anytime after 1987 however, Evander must be favored as Spinks' interest in the game had drastically diminished.
     
    mr. magoo, Jan 26, 2009
    mr. magoo, Jan 26, 2009
    #5
  6. zadfrak

    zadfrak Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,498
    3,080
    Feb 17, 2008
    Those Spinks legs had deteriorated quite a bit by then. That factor coupled with that 3 minutes per round of Holyfield throwing combos is going to be tough to deal with. I think Benton would've had him ready and prepared 100%.

    It certainly would've been a lot tougher fight for Spinks than the Tangstad & Cooney matchups.
     
    zadfrak, Jan 27, 2009
    zadfrak, Jan 27, 2009
    #6
  7. Longhhorn71

    Longhhorn71 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,714
    3,453
    Jan 6, 2007
    Holy a little too inexperienced at that stage.

    If Spinks can knock Cooney down....he can knock Holy down.

    Later on Holy became a true great heavy.
     
    Longhhorn71, Jan 27, 2009
    Longhhorn71, Jan 27, 2009
    #7