Printable View
I liked Moorer as a light heavy but he never fought long enough at the weight and the WBO was just a Kronk title at the time. I believe he would have been exposed at the top level, as a heavyweight his chin was suspect and against a great fighter he would have been KOed.
Michael Moorer didn't have enough achievements or quality opposition at 175 to be considered seriously.
Ezzard Charles has got to be up there. He never got a title shot due to the risk/reward being too high for the champs to fight him, but look at what he did at light-heavyweight.
3-0 against Archie Moore
3-1 against Jimmy Bivins
2-1 against Lloyd Marshall
2-0 against Joey Maxim
That's an 8-1 record against Hall of Famers, and Marshall's exclusion from Canastota is a glaring omission.
Ezzard also lost a controversial decision to the heavyweight Elmer "Violent" Ray, when he was giving up 20 lbs. He knocked Ray out a year later.
Surprised by the low number of votes for Michael Spinks.
Spinks was a great, great fighter.
He fought in a terrific LHW era and was undefeated at the weight, beating guys like Dwight Qawi, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Marvin Johnson, Yaqui Lopez, and the Davis brothers. Perhaps the most impressive thing about Michael was his versatility. He bombed out Marvin Johnson with one of the best uppercuts I've ever seen, but his main punch was actually his right hand, not his left uppercut. Spinks packed a wallop in that "Jinx" of a right hand, but he could also outbox guys as well behind his jab. His awkward style worked against Qawi and at heavyweight in the first fight against Larry Holmes (Holmes won the rematch regardless of what some judges said).
Larry Holmes won the first fight for me. I think it was taken from him because there was still a bit of racism around boxing then and they didn't want Homes, a black man levelling Marciano's 49-0 record and retiring champ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
Just my opinion though!!!
I thought Larry Holmes got outboxed in the first fight with Michael Spinks and i thought Michael Spinks won by 2 points that might of been revenge for his close decision wins against Tim Witherspoon/Carl Williams.......Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuLarry Holmes won the first fight for me. I think it was taken from him because there was still a bit of racism around boxing then and they didn't want Homes, a black man levelling Marciano's 49-0 record and retiring champ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
Just my opinion though!!!
Although funny enough i thought he edged Tim Witherspoon by 1 point based on winning alot of the early rounds but it was razor thin close and Tim Witherspoon had Larry Holmes hurt badly in the 9th round and i thought Larry Holmes beat Carl Williams by 1 point also by winning the last 4 rounds clearly......
Because up until that point Carl Williams was totally outboxing Larry Holmes with his jab and movement but Larry Holmes somehow got 2nd wind and started battering Carl Williams body and i had Larry Holmes behind by 3 points until he won the last 4 rounds clearly that was a great performance from Larry Holmes......
The 2nd Michael Spinks vs Larry Holmes fight was a robbery Larry Holmes was fired up for the rematch and come out like Joe Frazier and won the first 5 rounds.........
Larry Holmes did seem to get tired after that great start but he did manage to win another 3 rounds clearly making it 9-6 in favor of Larry Holmes that really was a terrible decision.
I thought the first Spinks-Holmes was fair. I had it 9-6 for Spinks. The rematch, I had Holmes winning by the same margin.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssssI thought Larry Holmes got outboxed in the first fight with Michael Spinks and i thought Michael Spinks won by 2 points that might of been revenge for his close decision wins against Tim Witherspoon/Carl Williams.......Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyuLarry Holmes won the first fight for me. I think it was taken from him because there was still a bit of racism around boxing then and they didn't want Homes, a black man levelling Marciano's 49-0 record and retiring champ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
Just my opinion though!!!
Although funny enough i thought he edged Tim Witherspoon by 1 point based on winning alot of the early rounds but it was razor thin close and Tim Witherspoon had Larry Holmes hurt badly in the 9th round and i thought Larry Holmes beat Carl Williams by 1 point also by winning the last 4 rounds clearly......
Because up until that point Carl Williams was totally outboxing Larry Holmes with his jab and movement but Larry Holmes somehow got 2nd wind and started battering Carl Williams body and i had Larry Holmes behind by 3 points until he won the last 4 rounds clearly that was a great performance from Larry Holmes......
The 2nd Michael Spinks vs Larry Holmes fight was a robbery Larry Holmes was fired up for the rematch and come out like Joe Frazier and won the first 5 rounds.........
Larry Holmes did seem to get tired after that great start but he did manage to win another 3 rounds clearly making it 9-6 in favor of Larry Holmes that really was a terrible decision.
I had Spoon beating Holmes 115-114. That fight could've gone either way. The problem I had with the decision was the judge having Holmes up 118-111. That's up there with Jo Jo Guerra's 118-110 for Leonard over Hagler, or Ken Morita's 87-86 for Tyson against Douglas. Morita is the same genius whom had DLH ahead of Quartey even to the point where if Quartey had won the 12th, he still would've had DLH winning. :rolleyes:
118-111 was for certain disgraceful considering the fight was probably one of the closest fights in history and one of the most underrated Heavyweight fights of the 80s........Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread StealerI thought the first Spinks-Holmes was fair. I had it 9-6 for Spinks. The rematch, I had Holmes winning by the same margin.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssssI thought Larry Holmes got outboxed in the first fight with Michael Spinks and i thought Michael Spinks won by 2 points that might of been revenge for his close decision wins against Tim Witherspoon/Carl Williams.......Quote:
Originally Posted by rjj tszyu
Although funny enough i thought he edged Tim Witherspoon by 1 point based on winning alot of the early rounds but it was razor thin close and Tim Witherspoon had Larry Holmes hurt badly in the 9th round and i thought Larry Holmes beat Carl Williams by 1 point also by winning the last 4 rounds clearly......
Because up until that point Carl Williams was totally outboxing Larry Holmes with his jab and movement but Larry Holmes somehow got 2nd wind and started battering Carl Williams body and i had Larry Holmes behind by 3 points until he won the last 4 rounds clearly that was a great performance from Larry Holmes......
The 2nd Michael Spinks vs Larry Holmes fight was a robbery Larry Holmes was fired up for the rematch and come out like Joe Frazier and won the first 5 rounds.........
Larry Holmes did seem to get tired after that great start but he did manage to win another 3 rounds clearly making it 9-6 in favor of Larry Holmes that really was a terrible decision.
I had Spoon beating Holmes 115-114. That fight could've gone either way. The problem I had with the decision was the judge having Holmes up 118-111. That's up there with Jo Jo Guerra's 118-110 for Leonard over Hagler, or Ken Morita's 87-86 for Tyson against Douglas. Morita is the same genius whom had DLH ahead of Quartey even to the point where if Quartey had won the 12th, he still would've had DLH winning. :rolleyes:
But i thought the commentator's were biased in favor of Tim Witherspoon and some of the rounds they were giving Tim Witherspoon i was like what the hell........
I thought Tim Witherspoon was far too defensive early on he did block most of Larry Holmes's jabs with his crab style defense but the problem is while Tim Witherspoon was blocking he wasn't throwing that much back in return........
And i gave majority of the early rounds to Larry Holmes based on workrate i think Tim Witherspoon comeback well in the later rounds but i thought Larry Holmes based on the early rounds just eeked out a razor thin decision......
But there for certain should have been rematch and i also would of liked to have seen Larry Holmes take on Greg Page, Pinklon Thomas etc........
Not sure why those fights never happened.
But to get back on topic i think Matthew Saad Muhammad deserves a mention excitement wise he was the most exciting Light Heavyweight of all time.....
His fights with Yaqui Lopez and Marvin Johnson are legendary i remember in the 2nd Yaqui Lopez fight where Matthew Saad Muhammad most of took about 30 unanswered punches......
His life story is also sad and its quite amazing how he become a World champion with all he went through an amazing fighter.
i think roy jones
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
Michael Spinks was my pick for the best. You just don't really know what could have happenend if he fought Bob Foster,I think he was too fast for Archie Moore.I think the majority here are looking at the accomplishment's so by far Archie but when you put these fighter's face to face you just never know. I would take Spinks over all of them,Bob Foster 2nd and Michael Moorer third.
Well Witherspoon got to fight Page before Holmes and won but then his next fight lost to Thomas. Just bad judgement on Holmes' promoter's side.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssss118-111 was for certain disgraceful considering the fight was probably one of the closest fights in history and one of the most underrated Heavyweight fights of the 80s........Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread StealerI thought the first Spinks-Holmes was fair. I had it 9-6 for Spinks. The rematch, I had Holmes winning by the same margin.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssss
I had Spoon beating Holmes 115-114. That fight could've gone either way. The problem I had with the decision was the judge having Holmes up 118-111. That's up there with Jo Jo Guerra's 118-110 for Leonard over Hagler, or Ken Morita's 87-86 for Tyson against Douglas. Morita is the same genius whom had DLH ahead of Quartey even to the point where if Quartey had won the 12th, he still would've had DLH winning. :rolleyes:
But i thought the commentator's were biased in favor of Tim Witherspoon and some of the rounds they were giving Tim Witherspoon i was like what the hell........
I thought Tim Witherspoon was far too defensive early on he did block most of Larry Holmes's jabs with his crab style defense but the problem is while Tim Witherspoon was blocking he wasn't throwing that much back in return........
And i gave majority of the early rounds to Larry Holmes based on workrate i think Tim Witherspoon comeback well in the later rounds but i thought Larry Holmes based on the early rounds just eeked out a razor thin decision......
But there for certain should have been rematch and i also would of liked to have seen Larry Holmes take on Greg Page, Pinklon Thomas etc........
Not sure why those fights never happened.
You were going so well until you got to your third choice WTF!Quote:
Originally Posted by The FightfanQuote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
Michael Spinks was my pick for the best. You just don't really know what could have happenend if he fought Bob Foster,I think he was too fast for Archie Moore.I think the majority here are looking at the accomplishment's so by far Archie but when you put these fighter's face to face you just never know. I would take Spinks over all of them,Bob Foster 2nd and Michael Moorer third.
Sometime back mine were Ezzard Charles Micheal Spinks Gene Tunney in that order its not changed plus the Chinese biuld Great walls ;D
Yeah, I don't really understand when people talk about Michael Moorer being one of the great light-heavyweights. He had an amazing KO record, but hell, so does Edwin Valero! I don't think the other champs were anxious to fight him, but still, it's not like he faced that high caliber of opposition and not like he looked great all the time either. He looked so-so for a lot of the Leslie Stewart fight, for instance.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYou were going so well until you got to your third choice WTF!Quote:
Originally Posted by The FightfanQuote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
Michael Spinks was my pick for the best. You just don't really know what could have happenend if he fought Bob Foster,I think he was too fast for Archie Moore.I think the majority here are looking at the accomplishment's so by far Archie but when you put these fighter's face to face you just never know. I would take Spinks over all of them,Bob Foster 2nd and Michael Moorer third.
Bob Foster love his ability