Thread: Michael Spinks retired too early.

Michael was 1 month shy of his 32nd birthday when he retired.

He was 31(21)-0-0 until his last fight against Mike Tyson when he was blown out in a round.

But against Tyson was the first time he was ever floored, and getting floored by Tyson is not shameful.

He could have offered more to boxing I feel, although he retired sensibly with his money and health.

Good fighter, I may be wrong but I feel he gets ignored when it comes to talking about the top fighters of that time.

Originally Posted by Vendettos

Michael was 1 month shy of his 32nd birthday when he retired.

He was 31(21)-0-0 until his last fight against Mike Tyson when he was blown out in a round.

But against Tyson was the first time he was ever floored, and getting floored by Tyson is not shameful.

He could have offered more to boxing I feel, although he retired sensibly with his money and health.

Good fighter, I may be wrong but I feel he gets ignored when it comes to talking about the top fighters of that time.

Some guys just become satisfied. Such was Spinks. He will forever be linked with Tyson, and that will cause us to look back at his career and highlights. He's a smart man if you ask me!

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Originally Posted by Vendettos

Michael was 1 month shy of his 32nd birthday when he retired.

He was 31(21)-0-0 until his last fight against Mike Tyson when he was blown out in a round.

But against Tyson was the first time he was ever floored, and getting floored by Tyson is not shameful.

He could have offered more to boxing I feel, although he retired sensibly with his money and health.

Good fighter, I may be wrong but I feel he gets ignored when it comes to talking about the top fighters of that time.

Some guys just become satisfied. Such was Spinks. He will forever be linked with Tyson, and that will cause us to look back at his career and highlights. He's a smart man if you ask me!

No doubt, but I don't think he would have retired had he beaten Tyson.

I think that you are right, in that he is often overlooked because of his last fight, but I think he made the right choice in retiring. There was really no place for him to go from there.

What was he supposed to do? Move to down to the Cruiserweight division?

There was nothing left for him and he could never compete with Tyson ... and he got a huge payday for the Tyson fight and retired at age 32 or something with his health intact.

Only move there was to make and it was a good one.

Spinks retired at the right time,the guy was never a real heavyweight anyway,But some
people forget that he was one of the great light heavyweights of all time. He left in good
health and good finances.Cant ask more than that.

Originally Posted by Vendettos

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Originally Posted by Vendettos

Michael was 1 month shy of his 32nd birthday when he retired.

He was 31(21)-0-0 until his last fight against Mike Tyson when he was blown out in a round.

But against Tyson was the first time he was ever floored, and getting floored by Tyson is not shameful.

He could have offered more to boxing I feel, although he retired sensibly with his money and health.

Good fighter, I may be wrong but I feel he gets ignored when it comes to talking about the top fighters of that time.

Some guys just become satisfied. Such was Spinks. He will forever be linked with Tyson, and that will cause us to look back at his career and highlights. He's a smart man if you ask me!

No doubt, but I don't think he would have retired had he beaten Tyson.

But looking at it though, he would have never beat Tyson in 100 meetings. Neither would he have beaten any of the more live and younger heavyweights other than a sluggish Cooney and/or an old Holmes- which the second time he barely won.

I mean, it was good what he did at that time. But it was what it was- there simply was no more money for him in the game. So, for him to generate enough money for it to be viable and risk his health/time and legacy and stick in, he decided to bow out.

People don't realize how much money it takes to prepare for a fight, especially if it's a long training camp- 3 to 5 months. You have to pay trainers, sparring partners, gym time, nutritionists, handlers, managers, promoters, etc... we're talking about championship caliber fights and pending on whether or not you give a shit about your name, etc... i.e., NOT like Buster Douglass after he beat Tyson and lost it all in 3-4 months by the time he fought Holyfield.

I reckon, for a championship or title eliminator fight with a lot at stake, you can end up spending anywhere betwee $250-$500 thousand on fight preparation and getting there, alone. This is on top of your other living expenses, etc...

Then, who else would it be there for him to draw? He wasn't going to beat Tyson within those three to four years, even with one hand tied behind Tyson's back and they fought 100 times. He would probably end up losing more money, time, resources, health, family life, business interests, etc... than if he were to bow out with the few million he had in his hand from the Tyson fight.

Spinks wouldn't of been able to alter the course of history. The 90's would still kick in and Holyfield, Bowed & Lewis would have all kicked his arse had he not he not already retired.

Butch lewis ensured spinks got millions for that fight so he was made. Tyson was dominate and there was no where for him to go.

Thoug I agree there was nowhere for him to go and no way for him to beat Tyson, I think he should have fought on atleast to not go out on a loss like that. If it were me, I woulda wanted to win 1 more fight---I mean, undefeated, never been knocked down even, no shame as 1 poster said losing to Tyson, why not take another fight and go out on a positive note?

Makes him look a bit like a goddam fucking sissy to bow-out right after getting blown-out in 90 seconds. LIke a dog running away from the sport scared with its tail between its legs.

Win 1 more fight, at that time ST Gordon and Carlos DeLeon were making noise in the cruisers, he coulda went and fought again to go out on a sweet note---the note he went out on will forever remind us that he was a loser in his last performance. And boy did he lose that night. Then he acted like Tyson took his soul. He quit forever.

Originally Posted by Vendettos

Michael was 1 month shy of his 32nd birthday when he retired.

He was 31(21)-0-0 until his last fight against Mike Tyson when he was blown out in a round.

But against Tyson was the first time he was ever floored, and getting floored by Tyson is not shameful.

He could have offered more to boxing I feel, although he retired sensibly with his money and health.

Good fighter, I may be wrong but I feel he gets ignored when it comes to talking about the top fighters of that time.

Michael Spinks had dodgy knees & had lost his hunger for the fight game: in short, he retired at the right time.

He got out of boxing with his health, wealth & faculties all intact.

He was & always will be an ATG & had nothing more to prove.

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Thoug I agree there was nowhere for him to go and no way for him to beat Tyson, I think he should have fought on atleast to not go out on a loss like that. If it were me, I woulda wanted to win 1 more fight---I mean, undefeated, never been knocked down even, no shame as 1 poster said losing to Tyson, why not take another fight and go out on a positive note?

Makes him look a bit like a goddam fucking sissy to bow-out right after getting blown-out in 90 seconds. LIke a dog running away from the sport scared with its tail between its legs.

Win 1 more fight, at that time ST Gordon and Carlos DeLeon were making noise in the cruisers, he coulda went and fought again to go out on a sweet note---the note he went out on will forever remind us that he was a loser in his last performance. And boy did he lose that night. Then he acted like Tyson took his soul. He quit forever.

But Spinks was semi-retired when he fought Tyson. If it weren't for the money he probably would not have fought at all.

Originally Posted by Syntax Error

Originally Posted by Vendettos

Michael was 1 month shy of his 32nd birthday when he retired.

He was 31(21)-0-0 until his last fight against Mike Tyson when he was blown out in a round.

But against Tyson was the first time he was ever floored, and getting floored by Tyson is not shameful.

He could have offered more to boxing I feel, although he retired sensibly with his money and health.

Good fighter, I may be wrong but I feel he gets ignored when it comes to talking about the top fighters of that time.

Michael Spinks had dodgy knees & had lost his hunger for the fight game: in short, he retired at the right time.

He got out of boxing with his health, wealth & faculties all intact.

He was & always will be an ATG & had nothing more to prove.

Yes I did notice he had knee supports on so his body looked to be giving way. He earned probably $30 million in that last fight so any fight after was going to difficult for him to get his motivation back up.

BTW I honestly think that even the Tyson that fought McBride would've beaten any version of Spinks

Originally Posted by TysonBomb

BTW I honestly think that even the Tyson that fought McBride would've beaten any version of Spinks

LOL... he (Spinks) may have lasted to the 4th or 5th round, but he would have crumbled.