LOL whatever ross, I don't even care about this thread anymore,

Yeah sure you can use all that to triangulate Holmes and then Spinks all the way to the top can't you..

Let me get it right for you, Holmes beat Ray when he was an old man who then went on to trouble McCall and Lewis so Holmes could have done the same to them too right. And because Holmes was older then, the younger version must have been able to kill Lewis right? And because Spinks beat Holmes when he was young he must have been better than Ray, McCall and even maybe Lewis too right?

There is a reason why they say triangulation doesn't work mate. People do have on and off days and styles make fights still applies to boxing, it's not completely superceded by size/athleticism/skills.

Maybe the old Holmes was heavier than the younger Holmes.. And maybe the old Holmes was smarter and more experienced than the younger one. And maybe Holmes did not know how to handle the smaller faster Spinks because Holmes was historically used to BEING that faster guy! And he wasn't used to chasing a small opponent around, Holmes usually fought back foot or stand up, he was never a killer or a banger like Tyson or like Arreola.

Just think about all that, and watch the 2 fights Arreola/Adamek and then Spinks/Holmes and see for yourself the difference is not so striking as you think and imo, the newer fight gets the nod!

I don't care how historically is remembered. Today everybody knows who Adamek and Arreola are and nobody knows anything much of Spinks except that skinny little guy who Tyson KO'd who should never have shared the same ring in the first place.