BoxRec

There is a massive difference between their competition. You've obviously not seen these guys fight or even read about them. I like that you use your eyes to predict fights. I do the same. I just don't understand why you would try and talk about something you have no knowledge of. Moore's opponents know they were nowhere near the level of spinks opponents. Eye test, resume, talent. Anyway you want to rate them, it's a gigantic mismatch. Moorer fought slightly less than wilder level opposition at light heavy.that doesn't mean he couldn't compete with better, he just didn't. Go ahead and admit you're completely wrong, it won't kill you.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:There is a massive difference between their competition. You've obviously not seen these guys fight or even read about them. I like that you use your eyes to predict fights. I do the same. I just don't understand why you would try and talk about something you have no knowledge of. Moore's opponents know they were nowhere near the level of spinks opponents. Eye test, resume, talent. Anyway you want to rate them, it's a gigantic mismatch. Moorer fought slightly less than wilder level opposition at light heavy.that doesn't mean he couldn't compete with better, he just didn't. Go ahead and admit you're completely wrong, it won't kill you.

I looked up both rec at lh and there aint a huge difference. Also like u said, just because someone didnt fought better opponents doesnt mean he cant compete with them.

Does spinks fought better opponents than moorer at lh? Yes he did.
Who would i predict as the winner, best version of both at lh against each other? I say moorer knocks him out late. Why? Spinks would stood toe to toe even against the biggest punchers ever, moorer a guy with a 100 % ko ratio strong chin and arguably more punching power than kovalev is a hell of dangerous opponent when you have enough balls to stand infront of him.

While that is a very weak, excuse laden admission that you're wrong. Fair enough, you should watch some of those guys fight. Spinks was dominant, but they all had awesome fights with each other. One of the best light heavyweight eras ever.

Spinks could stand in front of him or outbox him. Moorer faced one opponent of note, spinks was miles better than Stewart, and he stopped him on cuts in an even fight. Punching power was a slight edge for Moorer, spinks had more skills, better chin, better conditioning and a country mile of experience. It's possible, not likely. Spinks would be a 5-1 favorite.

Dont be too arrogant. Sound like a dickhead.

Jip wrote:Dont be too arrogant. Sound like a dickhead.

Oh well, at least I know what I'm talking about.ironic the self proclaimed expert calling someone else arrogant. Nice touch.

boxing_rocks wrote:I don't think Kovalev or Ward should be mentioned among top 5-10 ATG LHWs. Even though Kovalev sort of ruled the division with an iron fist, he never faced the other two top LHWs, Stevenson and Beterbiev. Looking at two of the other champions during the same period, 48-year old Hopkins and Fraud Shumenov, we can see that excluding Stevenson and Beterbiev, the division was weak, so ruling it without facing the other top guys, by itself can't put Kovalev in ATG list. An eye test also shows Kovalev's limitations in punch variety, inside game and some other areas.

If Kovalev is not among ATG LHWs, then neither is Ward once beaten by Kovalev.

We are talking about since 1980, not ATGs. Krushedner is top 10 since 1980, imo. I would put him on Moorer's level at LHW, along with SOGgy. Both rate above CalSlappy at LHW, imo.

Beterbiev has done nothing and does not deserve to be mentioned in this conversation at this time. Beterbiev v Gvozdyk is the fight that should be happening. The winner could fight Barrera. The loser could fight Smith Jr. If Beterbiev could get through those two fights then he could be considered for the current top five in the division.

Right now Beterbiev is somewhere in the mid level bottom half of the top ten. That is being generous. He hasn't earned it, yet.

Spinks. The rest is noise.

The answer is spinks, and I love Roy for the record.

Spinks at 175 was phenomenal. And is in the discussion for greats light heavy ever, no just since 1980.

Roy was pure brilliance, but my personal take is that Roy at 160-168 was better, despite having a thinner career there. At 175 Roy, apart from speed, gives away some slight physical advantages he had at the lower weights. When considering Roy at the lower weights you have a genuine discussion for ATG at them weights. Had it all.

Calzaghe is possibly the best 168er. Definitely in that discussion. At 175 no, hopkins was still a live top opponent. People who say he was 40+ etc really are slaves to statistics and don't judge things on merit. Hopkins after Calzaghe put in one of his greatest performances vs pavlik, and prior to Calzaghe vs tarver. Hopkins still had it. Roy sadly was beyond shot when Calzaghe fought him. Calzaghe beating Roy has no relevance whatsoever. Sorry valmar.

Kovalev and ward are good boxers and strong champions currently. They are miles off Roy let alone spinks though. Whoever didn't vote for spinks or Roy, no idea what you're playing at

Tanzio wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:I don't think Kovalev or Ward should be mentioned among top 5-10 ATG LHWs. Even though Kovalev sort of ruled the division with an iron fist, he never faced the other two top LHWs, Stevenson and Beterbiev. Looking at two of the other champions during the same period, 48-year old Hopkins and Fraud Shumenov, we can see that excluding Stevenson and Beterbiev, the division was weak, so ruling it without facing the other top guys, by itself can't put Kovalev in ATG list. An eye test also shows Kovalev's limitations in punch variety, inside game and some other areas.

If Kovalev is not among ATG LHWs, then neither is Ward once beaten by Kovalev.

We are talking about since 1980, not ATGs. Krushedner is top 10 since 1980, imo. I would put him on Moorer's level at LHW, along with SOGgy. Both rate above CalSlappy at LHW, imo.

Beterbiev has done nothing and does not deserve to be mentioned in this conversation at this time. Beterbiev v Gvozdyk is the fight that should be happening. The winner could fight Barrera. The loser could fight Smith Jr. If Beterbiev could get through those two fights then he could be considered for the current top five in the division.

Right now Beterbiev is somewhere in the mid level bottom half of the top ten. That is being generous. He hasn't earned it, yet.

Barrera already ducked Beterbiev. Gvozdyk may be at the same level as Arthur.

Tanzio wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote: It is your "pool." Do what you please. I have no problem with it. I just think that anyone voting for CalSlappy in your "pool" deserves a Moe job.

Tanzio, would you, please, put your top 5 LHW list (since 1980, prime to prime) ?

Michael Spinks
RJJ
Qawi
Virgil Hill
Michalczewski

SOGgy
Krushedner

Tanzio, believe me, it would be a lot of negative comments about your list, it would be someting like comments about "my list".

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

ValMar wrote:
Tanzio, would you, please, put your top 5 LHW list (since 1980, prime to prime) ?

Michael Spinks
RJJ
Qawi
Virgil Hill
Michalczewski

SOGgy
Krushedner

Tanzio, believe me, it would be a lot of negative comments about your list, it would be someting like comments about "my list".

Again, I have no problem with your list. I just think that those voting for CalSlappy need a wakeup slap.

Tanzio wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote: Michael Spinks
RJJ
Qawi
Virgil Hill
Michalczewski

SOGgy
Krushedner

Tanzio, believe me, it would be a lot of negative comments about your list, it would be someting like comments about "my list".

Again, I have no problem with your list. I just think that those voting for CalSlappy need a wakeup slap.

Again and again : JC defeated two excellent LHW in 2008. I do not think that any LHW has been able to defeat JC in 2008. I think so, really, JC has been invincible nine years ago. So, he deserved his place on "my list - prime to prime"...........

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

ValMar wrote:
Tanzio, believe me, it would be a lot of negative comments about your list, it would be someting like comments about "my list".

Again, I have no problem with your list. I just think that those voting for CalSlappy need a wakeup slap.

Again and again : JC defeated two excellent LHW in 2008. I do not think that any LHW has been able to defeat JC in 2008. I think so, really, JC has been invincible nine years ago. So, he deserved his place on "my list - prime to prime"...........

Valmar understand this, Calzaghe beat Roy Jones and has his name in his record, but Roy was completely finished, so what does it really mean? Roy had nothing left, anybody in boxing will tell you this and I'm sorry but it's a real newbie arguement you are making.

Berbick beat Ali
Williams beat Tyson
Donald beat Holyfield
Gavern beat Toney

These are the same as Calzaghe beating Roy. Sure they have the w and the name, but they were all finished. Please accept this as everyone has there own opinion but there can be no arguement on this

Ossyrules wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote: Again, I have no problem with your list. I just think that those voting for CalSlappy need a wakeup slap.

Again and again : JC defeated two excellent LHW in 2008. I do not think that any LHW has been able to defeat JC in 2008. I think so, really, JC has been invincible nine years ago. So, he deserved his place on "my list - prime to prime"...........

Valmar understand this, Calzaghe beat Roy Jones and has his name in his record, but Roy was completely finished, so what does it really mean? Roy had nothing left, anybody in boxing will tell you this and I'm sorry but it's a real newbie arguement you are making.

Berbick beat Ali
Williams beat Tyson
Donald beat Holyfield
Gavern beat Toney

These are the same as Calzaghe beating Roy. Sure they have the w and the name, but they were all finished. Please accept this as everyone has there own opinion but there can be no arguement on this

I have never pretended to be an expert, I am just a boxing fan, but there is no way to be a "newbie". I remember how I had been spending the whole nights, during my childhood, waiting to watch Ali, Frazier and Foreman. OK, I know this is off topic, but I had to say....
Opening this thread, I was curious about majority opinion of the best LHW (prime to prime, not the resume) since 1980. I do not like to use Google in order to search records and statistics, simply, I have not enough time to do anything like that.
Personally, I prefer to rewatch (on You Tube) HW fights from past, but recently I have rewatched some Calzaghe's fights (Lacy, Hopkins, Jones) and I was surprised because of his skills and speed, and this is the main reason I put him on this list/pool.
Again and again : Maybe, it is only my feeling, but I really think that noone, literally noone (at 175) could beat JC in 2008, something like nowadays situation - I feel that noone is capable to defeat Lomachenko at 130.....
Again, I have to apologise because of my broken English.....I has been a little bit lazy during my childhood.....

Jip wrote:

ldlamb wrote:Who knows what would happen if '83 Spinks and '89 Moorer fought...... But the comment that their LH oppositions were similar is just plain laughable.

Than tell me who besides qawi were so much better on spinks lh resume than what moorer had on his?

Moorer fought 22 times at lh, t/ko them ALL!!! His opponents at the end had similar records what spinks had, so not much difference in opponents quality.

Spinks fought 27 times, with 7 uds the rest t/ko. Same like moorer, spinks never had an atg lh opponent, the best opponent he faced was qawi, a man with 11 losses.

' Here is my Top 5 of each of their opponents.

Spinks----------------------------------- Moorer
1. Dwight Qawi-------------- Leslie Stewart
2. Eddie Mustafa Muhammed----- Frankie Swindell (2-5 is really all the same)
3. Marvin Johnson-------------- Freddie Delgado
4. Yaqui Lopez-------------- Ramzi Hassan
5. Eddie Davis------------- Mike Sedillo


Each fight Qawi/Stewart, Muhammed/Swindell, etc; the Spinks opponent would be a heavy favorite. In fact all 5 Spinks opponents would be heavy favorites against each guy but Stewart (who was beating Moorer before the fight was stopped).

Every guy in the Spinks top 5 was either a champion or a top contender in the era of only 2 titles.....4 of Moorer's 5 were nothing more than mere journeyman.

And, as far as Qawi having 11 losses...only 2 of those (1 being to Spinks) were at LH when he was relatively youthful. The rest came to Evander Holyfield, George Foreman, and when he was old.

I guess if James Toney had beaten Jones back in the 90s...you'd say he only beat a 9 loss fighter.

Jip wrote:

ldlamb wrote:Who knows what would happen if '83 Spinks and '89 Moorer fought...... But the comment that their LH oppositions were similar is just plain laughable.

Than tell me who besides qawi were so much better on spinks lh resume than what moorer had on his?

Moorer fought 22 times at lh, t/ko them ALL!!! His opponents at the end had similar records what spinks had, so not much difference in opponents quality.

Spinks fought 27 times, with 7 uds the rest t/ko. Same like moorer, spinks never had an atg lh opponent, the best opponent he faced was qawi, a man with 11 losses.

Please when you say things like Qawi lost 11 time's you know that's not the truth he didn't have 11 defeat's on his record when Spinks beat him stop misleading so you can get your point across and I believe Moorer reign at Light Heavyweight is not even close to being what Spinks reign was Michael Spinks was undisputed undefeated without doubt the best Light Heavyweight on planet earth so to compare Moorer with Spinks at Light Heavy is almost laughable...........

ValMar wrote:What do you think ? Would you explain your choice, please........

What a sh!t choice in the poll.

You left out so many boxers better then Kovalev.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Beterbiev isn't top 100. Nobody should be penalized for not fighting him, though I agree ward, nor kovalev rate that high. I'd rate kovalev higher than ward.

How does anyone rate Kovalev over Ward when he lost twice too the bloke good one No one ever bettered Michael Spinks at Light Heavyweight he beat Dwight Braxton Jones never faced anyone as good as him at Light Heavy in my opinion and I could never ever see Tarver KO Michael the way he smashed Roy I know this aint the school yard you beat him I beat you so i'm the best but I believe Spinks is the best Light Heavyweight I have seen since I was a 10 year old........Spinks Jinx is tha man

You rate spinks over Holmes at heavyweight?

No way was Michael a better Heavyweight then big Jack....Larry seen better day's when beatin by Spinks but then again Larry showed how great Spinks was by going on to fight and beat some world class Heavyweight's when he was in his 40's I still believe Holmes won the rematch Spinks was a LEGEND at his best fighting weight of light heavy

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

ValMar wrote:
Tanzio, believe me, it would be a lot of negative comments about your list, it would be someting like comments about "my list".

Again, I have no problem with your list. I just think that those voting for CalSlappy need a wakeup slap.

Again and again : JC defeated two excellent LHW in 2008. I do not think that any LHW has been able to defeat JC in 2008. I think so, really, JC has been invincible nine years ago. So, he deserved his place on "my list - prime to prime"...........

Now I get it; you not only included CalSlappy in your "pool," you also voted for him, didn't you ValMar?

You deserve another open handed full swing slap for good measure.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:I don't think Kovalev or Ward should be mentioned among top 5-10 ATG LHWs. Even though Kovalev sort of ruled the division with an iron fist, he never faced the other two top LHWs, Stevenson and Beterbiev. Looking at two of the other champions during the same period, 48-year old Hopkins and Fraud Shumenov, we can see that excluding Stevenson and Beterbiev, the division was weak, so ruling it without facing the other top guys, by itself can't put Kovalev in ATG list. An eye test also shows Kovalev's limitations in punch variety, inside game and some other areas.

If Kovalev is not among ATG LHWs, then neither is Ward once beaten by Kovalev.

We are talking about since 1980, not ATGs. Krushedner is top 10 since 1980, imo. I would put him on Moorer's level at LHW, along with SOGgy. Both rate above CalSlappy at LHW, imo.

Beterbiev has done nothing and does not deserve to be mentioned in this conversation at this time. Beterbiev v Gvozdyk is the fight that should be happening. The winner could fight Barrera. The loser could fight Smith Jr. If Beterbiev could get through those two fights then he could be considered for the current top five in the division.

Right now Beterbiev is somewhere in the mid level bottom half of the top ten. That is being generous. He hasn't earned it, yet.

Barrera already ducked Beterbiev. Gvozdyk may be at the same level as Arthur.

Beterbiev already ducked kovalev. Gvodzyk is better.

Tanzio wrote:

ValMar wrote:

Tanzio wrote: Again, I have no problem with your list. I just think that those voting for CalSlappy need a wakeup slap.

Again and again : JC defeated two excellent LHW in 2008. I do not think that any LHW has been able to defeat JC in 2008. I think so, really, JC has been invincible nine years ago. So, he deserved his place on "my list - prime to prime"...........

Now I get it; you not only included CalSlappy in your "pool," you also voted for him, didn't you ValMar?

You deserve another open handed full swing slap for good measure.

Tanzio, my friend, you are wrong, I did not vote at all.
Tanzio, my friend, you are right, I deserved "open handed full swing slap" because of opening this thread/pool.

Spinks would knock Roy out, late.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

How does anyone rate Kovalev over Ward when he lost twice too the bloke good one No one ever bettered Michael Spinks at Light Heavyweight he beat Dwight Braxton Jones never faced anyone as good as him at Light Heavy in my opinion and I could never ever see Tarver KO Michael the way he smashed Roy I know this aint the school yard you beat him I beat you so i'm the best but I believe Spinks is the best Light Heavyweight I have seen since I was a 10 year old........Spinks Jinx is tha man

You rate spinks over Holmes at heavyweight?

No way was Michael a better Heavyweight then big Jack....Larry seen better day's when beatin by Spinks but then again Larry showed how great Spinks was by going on to fight and beat some world class Heavyweight's when he was in his 40's I still believe Holmes won the rematch Spinks was a LEGEND at his best fighting weight of light heavy

But spinks beat him twice. You're going against yourself.

Looks like this one's gonna end in a tie.