What made Tyson vs Spinks Interesting?

Im convinced that due to stylistic reasons that Spinks always would trouble Holmes, maybe not beat him, probably not, but trouble him. Holmes was better with an opponent coming at him. Spinks made him play offense while he played defense. Plus I stand by my original statement. A 35 year old Holmes didnt suddenly find the fountain of youth as a 42 year old vs Holyfield.

 

They were put on him so he could sweep the ring without putting too much pressure on his knee caps...

 

I didn't like his socks either

 

Me too channy, got hundreds. I've been thinking for ages that i will start popping up threads when i nab something interesting from one. Most of them have something extremely notable in them at the very least.

 

Not a chance for me, not a chance. When they fought Holmes was immensely slower than he'd been, his stamina was nothing like what it was, his jab was a poor imitation on what it'd been and his right hand no better. His reflexes were so much slower too.

A much fresher faster sharper Holmes with that jab pumping would school Spinks. He hurt him late in one of their fights with an average right hand, at his peak i think he would likely stop him.

Spinks would be awkward, he has that great underrated defense and herky jerky effectiveness but the guys a light heavyweight. Even old Holmes beat him in the rematch realistically and he still looked OLD.

Many guys had been giving his extremely tough fights that would have been a lot less grueling 5 years prior.

Thrusting forward a 42yo Holmes getting easily defeated by Holyfield isn't going to fool anyone into thinking Holmes was anything but heavily declined against Spinks, let alone Tyson.

 

That was so thoughtful of him...lol!

 

I’m glad that Holmes has gotten more respect as the years have passed. Historically speaking, prime Holmes comes in ahead of Tyson, Holyfield and Lennox. In fact, he comes up just short of inclusion on heavyweight Mount Rushmore, which includes Johnson, Louis, Marciano, and Ali.

Prime Holmes beats Tyson. If they fight 10 times, I’m thinking Holmes wins at least 6 of them.

 

You're right there. He looked like sh!t against Holyfield.

 

Going back to the original question... and I was actively following boxing the time... Tyson-Spinks was hugely anticipated. The public was very interested. We had the real champion, Spinks, against the (at the time) media darling who'd been sort of gifted the organizational belts. Even Tyson's management at the time said they wouldn't consider him the real champion until he beat Spinks.

Granted, Tyson worked his butt off between 85-88 and beat a slew of top heavies. He'd certainly earned his place in the spotlight. His run definitely was more impressive than Spinks' time at heavyweight, despite Spinks' win over a living legend and blowout of Cooney. I just wasn't sold on him yet.

Hindsight tells me this was ridiculous, but at the time I thought Spinks would pull it off. I even bet a few bucks on it. The year before I thought Cooney would do to Spinks what Tyson did (I didn't know about Cooney's troubles at the time). We know what Spinks was able to do there. A few years before that I thought Qawi would blow through Spinks. Nope. Up to the Tyson fight Spinks always found a way to win. Additionally, I thought Tyson was overhyped and was heading toward a fall. I don't think I was the only one thinking these things.

Surprises dull with time. Time reveals the reasons surprises happened. We can look back and see the lack of confidence in Spinks, the messed up knee, the utter futility of his mission. But at the time many saw it as a stern test for Tyson or a way for Spinks to secure his legacy.

All that said, there was a little voice in my head, in the days leading up to the fight, saying, "Liston-Patterson." But I chose not to give it much credence and put my friendly wager money on Spinks.

 

Very good post.Thank you.

 

Holy field didn't "easily" beat Holmes. It was so tight that it was virtually guaranteed Holmes would have won had he been a few years younger

 

Holyfield won by scores of 116-112, 116-112 and 117-111. AP had it 118-110.

That is a convincing win. It was never in doubt whatsoever.

Is this another "Fergy" account?

 

And the only thing that kept Larry from suffering a late tko was the bad cut Evander had. Evander definitely backed off the gas pedal and fought smart to go ahead and not lose via tko. But the pattern of the fight and the amount of work Holmes was doing the first 6 rounds was going to spell a disaster the final 6.Bacck then, Evander sure did throw a ton of combos and all Holmes could do was wait until the end of flurries and throw a single counter. One thing he was not doing was exchanging with Holyfield.

 

I'll tell you why it's interesting to me: There's nothing better than the intersecting careers of Tyson, Holmes, Holyfield and their common opponents to vividly illustrate the adage "styles make fights".

 

Jinx never froze. Mike just had the answers to everything Spinks questioned.