Is Spinks An ATG?

[Rassclot]

is he considered one of the greatest of all time?

I know the Tyson loss greatly diminished his career but when you look at his actual achievements. you have to rank him ahead of guys like Calzaghe and James Toney.

He actually went from LHW to HW and beat an undefeated ATG HW in Larry Holmes. Those wins alone solidifies his legacy imo.

[DonairesRevenge]

Spinks is an ATG without a doubt. One of the best 175 fighters ever and a decent heavyweight.

[JAB5239]

Absolutely. He was the best fighter in arguably the toughest 175lb era ever.

[NChristo]

Of course he is, went undefeated and dominated his era, top 5 GOAT at Light Heavy imo, one of the most skilled boxers I've seen.

[Rassclot]

so why do people discredit Tyson's absolute humiliating win over him?


If someone stops Manny Pacquiao today in the 1st round at WW. it would essentially be the same thing. Does that person get no credit because Pacquiao came up from a lot lower?

[DonairesRevenge]

so why do people discredit Tyson's absolute humiliating win over him?


If someone stops Manny Pacquiao today in the 1st round at WW. it would essentially be the same thing. Does that person get no credit because Pacquiao came up from a lot lower?

It suits Tyson haters agendas that he only fought cans. Spinks is a great win for Tyson and that aint even up for debate.

[NChristo]

so why do people discredit Tyson's absolute humiliating win over him?


If someone stops Manny Pacquiao today in the 1st round at WW. it would essentially be the same thing. Does that person get no credit because Pacquiao came up from a lot lower?

It is a very very good win, but Michael was clearly not at his best at Heavyweight, he just wasn't the same at all.

People discredit it too much though I find, usually because of how easily Tyson did away with him and also because a lot of people only know him for the Tyson fight and not so much for his fantastic career, they see the fight and think
"OMG Tyson did away with him in a minute, must be a bum"

[DonairesRevenge]

It is a very very good win, but Michael was clearly not at his best at Heavyweight, he just wasn't the same at all.

People discredit it too much though I find, usually because of how easily Tyson did away with him and also because a lot of people only know him for the Tyson fight and not so much for his fantastic career, they see the fight and think
"OMG Tyson did away with him in a minute, must be a bum"

He took Larrys "0" and chinned Cooney, Spinks was a very good heavyweight.

[NChristo]

He took Larrys "0" and chinned Cooney, Spinks was a very good heavyweight.

He was not at his best at Heavyweight, it's not even debatable, the 1st Holmes fight if I remember right Holmes did not turn up in shape at all and the 2nd fight is questionable and Cooney wasn't that good or at least was never in Spinks' class.

[joseph5620]

He was not at his best at Heavyweight, it's not even debatable, the 1st Holmes fight if I remember right Holmes did not turn up in shape at all and the 2nd fight is questionable and Cooney wasn't that good or at least was never in Spinks' class.

That's how I see it too. I think Spinks won the first fight with a faded Holmes but lost the second fight. He really never proved to be the same fighter at heavyweight than he was at 175.