I would say that is the defining list. What a great round robin of trilogy events that list would make. The only guaranteed sweep would be Charles over Moore, due to an odd glitch in the Matrix. (Whereby the very best lightweight of all time can never defeat the 2nd best lightweight of all time.)
Michael Spinks: Rank him
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
I would say that is the defining list. What a great round robin of trilogy events that list would make. The only guaranteed sweep would be Charles over Moore, due to an odd glitch in the Matrix. (Whereby the very best lightweight of all time can never defeat the 2nd best lightweight of all time.)
-
Teddy's Toupee
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 2903
- Joined: 25 Sep 2010, 17:37
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
Is this the same glitch whereby you waffle on about lightweights when it's a thread about light heavyweights?BoxBuzz wrote: ↑22 Feb 2021, 13:11
I would say that is the defining list. What a great round robin of trilogy events that list would make. The only guaranteed sweep would be Charles over Moore, due to an odd glitch in the Matrix. (Whereby the very best lightweight of all time can never defeat the 2nd best lightweight of all time.)
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
Very very closely aligned in it's quantum physics aspects.....however each glitch is unique unto itself when it comes to the matrix. So as is often the case, the answer is both yes.....and yet......no.Teddy's Toupee wrote: ↑22 Feb 2021, 19:08Is this the same glitch whereby you waffle on about lightweights when it's a thread about light heavyweights?BoxBuzz wrote: ↑22 Feb 2021, 13:11
I would say that is the defining list. What a great round robin of trilogy events that list would make. The only guaranteed sweep would be Charles over Moore, due to an odd glitch in the Matrix. (Whereby the very best lightweight of all time can never defeat the 2nd best lightweight of all time.)
And I think you knew that before you asked this question.
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
He’s number four for me.
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
M.Spinks is # 1 for me.A great versatile,durable fighter that was smart,could box,,slug,good defense,good chin,excellent power and skills. He had it all.And he would figure out his opponent and adapt.
I think he beats all the other candidates,though I've only heard and read about Greb.
He handled Dwight Braxton fairly easily when Braxton was on a tear steamrolling the division.I think he would have been too rugged and savage for Bob Foster.He would find a way to win.
He would have used his height speed & reach to pummel Galindez.
At 175,Spinks was an ATG.and none of the recent 175 Champions could compete.Hopkins,Jones,Mccallum all lose to him.(to me)
I think he beats all the other candidates,though I've only heard and read about Greb.
He handled Dwight Braxton fairly easily when Braxton was on a tear steamrolling the division.I think he would have been too rugged and savage for Bob Foster.He would find a way to win.
He would have used his height speed & reach to pummel Galindez.
At 175,Spinks was an ATG.and none of the recent 175 Champions could compete.Hopkins,Jones,Mccallum all lose to him.(to me)
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
What about John Henry Lewis? He won over 100 fights, won 60 by KO, and was only stopped once, by Joe Louis in his final fight.
Don't know how to rank Lewis with the light heavyweights, but it seems like he was pretty good. Any ideas about him?
Don't know how to rank Lewis with the light heavyweights, but it seems like he was pretty good. Any ideas about him?
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
Bob Foster needs to be in there. He has the edge over Spinks.
-
Onetimeonly
- Super Featherweight
- Posts: 11584
- Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 06:28
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15185
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
He was a great fighter. Probably just outside the Top 10 for light heavyweights.
-
funso banjo baby
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4417
- Joined: 23 Sep 2005, 11:05
Re: Michael Spinks: Rank him
Really lovely to watch.
Terrific fast hands
Terrific fast hands