BoxRec

Leon Spinks.

Deno1986 wrote:Leon Spinks.

great call
could you imagine what type of career leon
would of had,if he did not have the drug
and mental problems

MEISINGER wrote:

Deno1986 wrote:Leon Spinks.

great call
could you imagine what type of career leon
would of had,if he did not have the drug
and mental problems

Because he was such a freakish talent!?

He was limited, to say the least.

Whether you count his first loss to be against Trinidad (nod to my Rican friends, y'all know you are the only ones D ) or Mosley, De La Hoya got a stack of work done prior to his inaugural defeat.

Julio cesar chavez

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

MEISINGER wrote:

Deno1986 wrote:Leon Spinks.

great call
could you imagine what type of career leon
would of had,if he did not have the drug
and mental problems

Because he was such a freakish talent!?

He was limited, to say the least.

olympic gold medal winner
and beat ali

yeah the guy had no talent what so ever.

leon could of been a very good pro.
if he had self motivation and control.
drugs and mental issues made it so he never
attained his true potential.



i am not saying the guy would of been great but come on
he had talent

Smokin Joe
John Mugabi- As much as ruined gets thrown around on message boards. I really think Hagler & Duff ruined John that night.

MEISINGER wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

MEISINGER wrote: great call
could you imagine what type of career leon
would of had,if he did not have the drug
and mental problems

Because he was such a freakish talent!?

He was limited, to say the least.

olympic gold medal winner
and beat ali

yeah the guy had no talent what so ever.

leon could of been a very good pro.
if he had self motivation and control.
drugs and mental issues made it so he never
attained his true potential.



i am not saying the guy would of been great but come on
he had talent

Yeah, thanks for quoting me when I said he had no talent whatsoever. Olympic pedigree counts for sh!t in the pros, incidentally. You either have it at the top-level, or you don't. There have been just as many prodigious amateurs who failed in the pro ranks as there have been who succeeded. He was a smaller fighter in a growing division, who lacked several key ingredients to have a great career at Heavy --- the ability to deal with Larry Holmes being one of them, whether he was clean & sober or not.

& BTW, since there are just so many of you who use the phrase, "could/would/should OF," can I just ask, when you repeat that phrase back to yourself, does it appear to make any God damn sense whatsoever? Because it does not.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

MEISINGER wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote: Because he was such a freakish talent!?

He was limited, to say the least.

olympic gold medal winner
and beat ali

yeah the guy had no talent what so ever.

leon could of been a very good pro.
if he had self motivation and control.
drugs and mental issues made it so he never
attained his true potential.



i am not saying the guy would of been great but come on
he had talent

Yeah, thanks for quoting me when I said he had no talent whatsoever. Olympic pedigree counts for sh!t in the pros, incidentally. You either have it at the top-level, or you don't. There have been just as many prodigious amateurs who failed in the pro ranks as there have been who succeeded. He was a smaller fighter in a growing division, who lacked several key ingredients to have a great career at Heavy --- the ability to deal with Larry Holmes being one of them, whether he was clean & sober or not.

& BTW, since there are just so many of you who use the phrase, "could/would/should OF," can I just ask, when you repeat that phrase back to yourself, does it appear to make any God damn sense whatsoever? Because it does not.

so i guess beating ali and drawing with scott ledoux in first 8 fights shows no talent
following his loss to ali,leon had wins over evanelista,mercado, and a draw with eddie lopez.

i don't know about you but i would be damn proud of the first half of his career
if it was mine.a combined record of 17-5-2 through his loss to qawi
the guy was thrown to the wolves from the start of his career,but still attained
more than most.the guy was undisputed heavyweight champion of the world.
and on top of that beat ali.
all 5 of his losses in the first half of his career were to either current or future world champions.

make fun of him all you want,but the guy had talent.

Amazing. Wonder how many times here I'll need to say I never said he didnt.

Mike Tyson, obviously.

Wilfredo Benitez, had already won the title at age 17, never the same after Leonard beat him.

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:Mike Tyson, obviously.

Wilfredo Benitez, had already won the title at age 17, never the same after Leonard beat him.

Nah, he had an excellent run at 54 too. Including possibly the biggest win of his career when he dominated Duran.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:Mike Tyson, obviously.

Wilfredo Benitez, had already won the title at age 17, never the same after Leonard beat him.

Nah, he had an excellent run at 54 too. Including possibly the biggest win of his career when he dominated Duran.

You'd class it as a bigger win for him than Cervantes?

Close call, Cervantes was better at 40 than Duran was at 54 and doing it at 17 is unheard of. But the manner in which he beat Roberto was impressive enough to be in the discussion.

Ezzard wrote:I don't think Taylor was finished after Chavez. He was poorly managed and should never have been put in with Norris. That was just ridiculous and they messed up his career and his health.

Taylor had everything to be a great and in the ring I believe he was. I think Taylor-Whittaker would have been a legitimate 50-50 fight prime for prime.

I'd also back Taylor against Moseley and Mayweather.

Man, the Taylor - Norris fight is one that grates on me till this day.
Never should have happened and Taylors people deserve heavy criticism for throwing him in against Terry.
I dont see how they thought he was gonna win that against the naturally bigger and way more powerful fighter.My guess is they didnt. I dont care what they weighed in at,Norris had obvious physical advantages. Plus he was a helluva puncher. Freakin payday and thats where its at.

BarryWashington wrote:couldn't seem to recover.

i'll name four boxers and you tell me who accomplished the most before their first loss (and a loss that seemed to be the end of their prime)

michael nunn
alfonso zamora
donald curry
meldrick taylor

Hard to say who accomplished the most. They all looked really good until their first loss.
I would say Nunn handled the loss the best of the four. He didn't seem to be quite the fighter that he had once been; he seemed to be overly cautious. However, his career didn't nosedive like the other three.

His other losses were close decisions to good fighters. He couldn't get fights against the very best. (ie a rematch with Toney, or a title shot against Jones)

John Tate never got over the Weaver loss