was mike spinks power comparable at lh to bob foster

[Sugarj]

Not only was Cooney past his prime, he was a pretty bad alcoholic back then. His performance against Spinks was pathetic. Cooney was in much better shape when he fought Foreman later.

Agreed, though Foreman nearly killed him.......

That said, I do recall Foreman saying that in round one he took one of the heaviest left hooks ever from Gerry.

As for the thread, I do think Bob Foster had the heavier punch, but Spinks had terrific power too.

[mickey malone]

Cooney was also clearly past his best. Put the cooney of the norton fight in against spinks and he does a demolition job on Michael.

I pick Foster to win by late round KO, his left jab would offset Michael's awkward rhythm and eventually land with the epic left hook that would stop Spinks.

Take on board what you're saying, but whatever Spinks did at heavyweight, he did twice as well at lhvt and Foster imo was never tested by any good punchers at 175, and we all saw what happened every time he stepped in at heavy..
Admittedly, Spinks only beat pp hvwts, but, Tyson aside, was able to take the blows, and also fought in better company than Bob did as a lightheavy.. Qawi, Mustafa Muhammad, Johnson, could all **** a bit, and were better than anyone Foster beat..
Spinks jerking side to side movement would offset Foster's jab, aswell as his chances of landing the left hook..

[greynotsoold]

A couple things are being overlooked here, namely the right hand of Foster and the left of Spinks. Foster had a real stiff right hand and there were a couple guys that I recall Spinks stopping with single left hooks.
I think that the hook of Foster was the superior punch, better than the right of Spinks. Good fighters don't get hit by right hands, but you can ambush them with left hooks.
Cooney...he didn't know much about how to fight. How could he, with all the 50 second kos? Spinks hit him with 85 out of 101 in the last round of their fight. He would never, ever hit Foster like that because Foster knew how to fight.

[Anthony342]

Not only was Cooney past his prime, he was a pretty bad alcoholic back then. His performance against Spinks was pathetic. Cooney was in much better shape when he fought Foreman later.

And I imagine he was when he fought Holmes as well?

[mickey malone]

A couple things are being overlooked here, namely the right hand of Foster and the left of Spinks. Foster had a real stiff right hand and there were a couple guys that I recall Spinks stopping with single left hooks.
I think that the hook of Foster was the superior punch, better than the right of Spinks. Good fighters don't get hit by right hands, but you can ambush them with left hooks.
Cooney...he didn't know much about how to fight. How could he, with all the 50 second kos? Spinks hit him with 85 out of 101 in the last round of their fight. He would never, ever hit Foster like that because Foster knew how to fight.

Yes, I've overlooked a few things, but not the fundamental point, which is that Foster fought in a much easier lhvt division than Spinks, which i feel over-glamorizes a lot of his early wins, but your right about Cooney who's best was against Holmes, in an effort that ironically similarizes that of British hero, Chris Finnegan when he challenged Foster for the title.. Cooney earned more than 10 times for that one fight, than Chris did for the whole of his career, but he was without a doubt, one of Bob's toughest challengers.

[greynotsoold]

Yes, I've overlooked a few things, but not the fundamental point, which is that Foster fought in a much easier lhvt division than Spinks, which i feel over-glamorizes a lot of his early wins, but your right about Cooney who's best was against Holmes, in an effort that ironically similarizes that of British hero, Chris Finnegan when he challenged Foster for the title.. Cooney earned more than 10 times for that one fight, than Chris did for the whole of his career, but he was without a doubt, one of Bob's toughest challengers.

It isn't like Spinks fought a murder's row; a lot of the guys he fought at 175 were punching bags. Undeniably the same is true of foster's career. I think it is true of just about any fighter of the last 50 years or so, after the numbers of pro fighters plummeted.
I recently watched the Foster/Finnegan fight. Did you think that Finnegan was ever in a position to win that fight? I never did; he fought his heart out, and it took a long time for Foster to beat him, but I never felt that Finnegan was in a spot to win.
As to a Foster/Spinks comparison...Hard fight. Spinks isn't going to hit Foster with that right hand because Foster knew how to fight and kept his body turned. He is more likely to hit Spinks with the hook but that wouldn't be easy because Michael Spinks knew how to fight as well. I think Spinks is a bit more open to getting hit than is Foster, and I think foster may be a bit more shrewd at hitting tough to hit guys than was Spinks.

[Ray Corso]

Spinks and Foster are very simular to me! Both awkward in their movements and slow a foot! Both with above average power and both were the tops of their era! Both moved up and didn't fare that well (sorry Spinks win over Holmes was a joke, even the second one which was closer stunk) That was Larrys punishment from the old regime about his comments about Marciano!!!!

Their both top ten at 175 and given their KO abilities could beat each other at any time I guess!

Heres a name for the 175 mix........................Billy Conn!! Ray.

[GeneralZod]

And I imagine he was when he fought Holmes as well?

Cooney's last prime fight was against Holmes, if you're referring to him and not Spinks.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Just pure power i would go with foster,, even though i think spinks is a better fighter, and i would pick spinks to win vs foster,,,

Foster's power was amplified by the fact he wasnt fighting in an era with alot of tough lhw. Mike quarry was a midget in there vs foster, and you saw how that ended,, Foster almost beheaded him,,,, but Quarry was not a legit top level LHW imo....

[Scott9945]

Just pure power i would go with foster,, even though i think spinks is a better fighter, and i would pick spinks to win vs foster,,,

Foster's power was amplified by the fact he wasnt fighting in an era with alot of tough lhw. Mike quarry was a midget in there vs foster, and you saw how that ended,, Foster almost beheaded him,,,, but Quarry was not a legit top level LHW imo....

Quarry was average size for lightheavies then, I think he was about 6'0. And Mike was something like 36-0 going into that fight, so he was a legitimate title contender.