Michael Spinks versus Marciano-both at 185

[Sugarj]

Actually no, I wouldn't pick the Ezzard Charles that lost to Marciano over the 85/86 Larry Holmes, I'd pick a decision loss. As for Cooney, yea I go with Charles over the 86/87 Gerry.....but not by KO. But the thread concerned a 185LB Spinks, he was rather heavier than this for Holmes (around 15-20Lbs heavier).

I dont think a 185Lb Spinks would have beaten Holmes either night. Those fights were pretty close anyway, Spinks probably deserved the first, but Holmes was a little unlucky second time round. Both were close, no doubt! But Holmes was 36, twenty defenses behind him, he'd destroyed Michael's older brother Leon and I dont think he was over motivated for the first match. He was clearly motivated for the second but threw too much in completely dominating the first half of the fight, leaving his old lungs gasping for the full 15 rounds.

Perhaps I'm being a touch harsh on how a 185Lb Spinks compares to the 185-190Lb Charles who went the distance with Marciano. Charles was terrific in both the Marciano fights. Its hard to imagine Spinks being much better at a comparable weight. But I've been wrong on head to head matchups before! So Hell.....

[prinzemanspopa]

There was nothing close about the first fight between Spinks-Holmes.It's quite amazing that people even dare to question the decisive win that Spinks scored over Holmes.



Holmes was past his prime,but not completely wasted.His peak was lasted from about the late 70's into the early 80's.

Prime Holmes would most likely have beaten him,but I think we can all agree that Spinks is the greater fighter of the two.

[Sugarj]

I'm a big Holmes fan, but I give fight 1 to Spinks. It was close on the cards and appeared close to me. But hell the right man won which is what matters! A nuthugger would claim a Holmes robbery in fight 2, but I'd say that Holmes probably shaded it, a draw might have been just.

Its interesting that you say that prime Holmes would have probably beaten him but then say Spinks is the greater fighter of the two??! With his 3-1 record at heavyweight.

Or were you implying that you think Spinks is better than Ezzard Charles?

[StarshipTrooper]

Really ? So you pick HW Ezzard Charles to eek 2 decisions over Larry Holmes and to stop Gerry Cooney ?
well , I don't.
at LHW (controversial) but more so at HW Spinks is superior to Charles.
Charles a former MW , Spinks taller (rangier) and hits harder than Charles .
Regarding the thread's topic
I do not want to pick a winner between Spinks and Marciano at whatever weight because I think it is either man's fight , I posted this fantasy fight somewhere else .

Spinks had a grand total of 6 fights at Heavyweight. Controversal at Light Heavyweight? Controversal to whom? Charles is the concensus pick of boxing historians as the best Light Heavy ever. Spinks hit harder? Charles hit plenty hard prior to killing Sam Barodi. You should really try learning about these fighters instead of talking out of you ass.

Poet

[Vadrigar.]

Spinks had a grand total of 6 fights at Heavyweight. Controversal at Light Heavyweight? Controversal to whom? Charles is the concensus pick of boxing historians as the best Light Heavy ever. Spinks hit harder? Charles hit plenty hard prior to killing Sam Barodi. You should really try learning about these fighters instead of talking out of you ass.

Poet

where would you rank Bob Foster?

[wmute]

It's hard to tell.

While Spinks is a great fighter, he lacked some finesse compared to the greater Charles, who was unable to get the job done.

However, size matters. I would not be shocked if Spinks was able to win a decision, as his being "thicker" might help him last the grueling 15 rounds he'd be in for.

[StarshipTrooper]

where would you rank Bob Foster?

I rank Foster #4 all-time at Light-Heavyweight. That's somewhat controversial around here as Foster fought in a weak era for Light-Heavies and he gets downgraded quite a bit because of it.

Poet

[prinzemanspopa]

Its interesting that you say that prime Holmes would have probably beaten him but then say Spinks is the greater fighter of the two??! With his 3-1 record at heavyweight.

Or were you implying that you think Spinks is better than Ezzard Charles?

I don't understand the Ezzard Charles reference,but yes,Michael Spinks rates higher than Larry Holmes on any ATG list.


Spinks wasn't a natural heavyweight by any means.The guy bulked up to fight as a heavyweight.



Spinks is about as underrated a modern ATG as you'll ever find in this sport.

[Sugarj]

Oh, the Charles reference concerned an earlier post. Dont worry about it!

As heavyweights go I think most would rate Holmes higher than Spinks on an ATG list. Many would rate Holmes top 5 or top 10.

On an ATG pound for pound list it is a tougher call. Michael Spinks was clearly one of the best light heavyweights ever, again top 5 or top 10. But even then Holmes would 'just' get the nod from me.......and I'd venture many others too.

But yes, we are in full agreement. Spinks is sorely underated as a modern ATG. That bleeding Tyson fight ruined everything..........

[McGoorty]

Spinks with the jinx wins a decision

Nah,.... MARCIANO by KNOCKOUT in 1st Round, Spinks would suffer the same as in the Tyson fight, how long did that last ? just one reasonable shot from Marciano and lights out for Spinks,... in fact EZZARD CHARLES would beat Michael up too.