Tyson-Spinks.

[Dempsey-Louis]

Agree.

I’ve written some really bad posts, here and on other forums, because I’ve been drunk as a skunk.

But, I’ve come to the conclusion it doesn’t matter on internet. Any post you regret will soon be drowned and forgotten because of the net’s constant cacaphony. Unfortunately, if you write some wise stuff, it will drown and be forgotten as well.

Unless of course you become famous, then something you wrote 12 years ago will suddenly surface and you will be held accountable, drunk as a stunk or not. Best thing to do, don't become famous, and never run for political office, then something you said back in ****ing grade school will come back to haunt you.

"Only in America"

[Dempsey-Louis]

Agreed. Spinks seemed shaken before the contest ever started.

Didn't they have to delay the fight because Spinks wouldn't come out of the dressing room?

They say it took Butch Lewis a couple of months to get Spinks on board for the fight; he was really resistant to taking the fight.

I am not sure, is fair to put Spinks on the list with Walcott and Liston, fighters who took one last big payday, intending to lay down as soon as they took a big punch? I feel strongly that's what Walcott and Liston did.

[OctoberRed]

Didn't they have to delay the fight because Spinks wouldn't come out of the dressing room?

They say it took Butch Lewis a couple of months to get Spinks on board for the fight; he was really resistant to taking the fight.

I am not sure, is fair to put Spinks on the list with Walcott and Liston, fighters who took one last big payday, intending to lay down as soon as they took a big punch? I feel strongly that's what Walcott and Liston did.

I dont recall. I watched a tape the next day. Didnt watch the live PPV feed

[billeau2]

This fight was one of those times where a compounding of problems becomes a disaster and it is not recognized until 20 20 hindsight.

I don't think Spinks being a light heavy per se had anything to do with it...virtually all the guys who were great light heavies were somewhat succesful fighting up, and to say they lost because of the weight is debatable at best... For example, Ezzard Charles lost to Marciano for any number of reasons, but not because he was not a "full blown" heavyweight...any more than Tunney beat Dempsey as less than a full blown heavy weight. Or to really confuse the issue? Did Tunney's only professional loss to Greb, a middleweight/light heavyweight, have to do with him carrying...too much weight?

As Ray has said many times, the heavyweight division is an open division...and while there is a Platonic perfect heavyweight build... a guy like Ieubuchi for example, it does not follow that this ensures success.

Spinks was coming off a layoff, he did not have the mobility he needed to operate against Tyson's early onslaught (and he knew it). Bad match up...If a pressure fighter can catch you its one thing, if that pressure fighter has two good hands, is also a premier puncher... and if you do not have mobility...you have some problems. Spinks could not tie Tyson up, mike was too strong, and Spinks had no way to keep Mike at bay because he didn't have the power to compensate for the lack of mobility.

Holmes lost to Tyson for some of the same reasons actually: He lasted longer because he was able to be mobile for a while and keep Tyson at bay until he wasn't. With Spinks any one of these factors was bad, together they were catastrophic. Being rusty, a slow starter, lacking mobility, not having another means to control a bigger opponent who was one of the fastest starters, who was amidextrious with equal power, who was not only able to apply pressure, but who was a great puncher....it was never going to work and Spinks, being a lot smarter than leone, or Corrie, knew that! hence the look of death on his face coming into the ring.

[The Old LefHook]

--- seen plenty of fighters look fearful and win...poster boy being Lennox Lewis.

No need to go full blown schoolboy psychpop when the reasons are obvious and documented

Get ur Corso straight, boy. Study!

[Dempsey-Louis]

This fight was one of those times where a compounding of problems becomes a disaster and it is not recognized until 20 20 hindsight.

I don't think Spinks being a light heavy per se had anything to do with it...virtually all the guys who were great light heavies were somewhat succesful fighting up, and to say they lost because of the weight is debatable at best... For example, Ezzard Charles lost to Marciano for any number of reasons, but not because he was not a "full blown" heavyweight...any more than Tunney beat Dempsey as less than a full blown heavy weight. Or to really confuse the issue? Did Tunney's only professional loss to Greb, a middleweight/light heavyweight, have to do with him carrying...too much weight?

As Ray has said many times, the heavyweight division is an open division...and while there is a Platonic perfect heavyweight build... a guy like Ieubuchi for example, it does not follow that this ensures success.

Spinks was coming off a layoff, he did not have the mobility he needed to operate against Tyson's early onslaught (and he knew it). Bad match up...If a pressure fighter can catch you its one thing, if that pressure fighter has two good hands, is also a premier puncher... and if you do not have mobility...you have some problems. Spinks could not tie Tyson up, mike was too strong, and Spinks had no way to keep Mike at bay because he didn't have the power to compensate for the lack of mobility.

Holmes lost to Tyson for some of the same reasons actually: He lasted longer because he was able to be mobile for a while and keep Tyson at bay until he wasn't. With Spinks any one of these factors was bad, together they were catastrophic. Being rusty, a slow starter, lacking mobility, not having another means to control a bigger opponent who was one of the fastest starters, who was amidextrious with equal power, who was not only able to apply pressure, but who was a great puncher....it was never going to work and Spinks, being a lot smarter than leone, or Corrie, knew that! hence the look of death on his face coming into the ring.

Spinks style, at least with Holmes and Cooney, necessitated that he jump in and out, and while Holmes wasn't, Cooney was a pressure fighter yet Spinks, at the time, had the mobility to get in and out.

As you say, with Tyson, Spinks no longer had that mobility (his knee was gone) and Tyson put on too much pressure with both hands. 20-20 hindsight the fight probably never should have happened, but it was a great payday for Spinks and he deserved it. He managed his career correctly, fought the fights he should have fought and wasn't a dirty fighter, he had a right to cash in.

I, using 20-20 sight chose not to buy that fight; Trump and King didn't get my money.

[billeau2]

Spinks style, at least with Holmes and Cooney, necessitated that he jump in and out, and while Holmes wasn't, Cooney was a pressure fighter yet Spinks, at the time, had the mobility to get in and out.

As you say, with Tyson, Spinks no longer had that mobility (his knee was gone) and Tyson put on too much pressure with both hands. 20-20 hindsight the fight probably never should have happened, but it was a great payday for Spinks and he deserved it. He managed his career correctly, fought the fights he should have fought and wasn't a dirty fighter, he had a right to cash in.

I, using 20-20 sight chose not to buy that fight; Trump and King didn't get my money.

Oh yeah... Spinks was right to grab that money. It was sad but he got over it...probably way before he spent that money!

Ahh Dempsey with King, as much as i despise the man, loathe him... His cards were a great value compared to what they want people to buy these days. That is truly ironic.

[Jack Flak]

--- Yep, think Tommy was Manny's first big time fighter, a perfect match.

Much to the animosity of Mike McCallum who has held a cottage industry level grudge against Manny and Tommy ever since.

Can't blame him though.

McCallum would have banged Tommy out. And they knew
it.