Michael Spinks

[Boom Boom]

He is definately most remembered for the Tyson fight, but part of that is his own doing. He could have tried to rebound from the loss and prove his toughness by overcoming his first defeat. Or he just should have retired before fighting Tyson. He clearly wanted nothing to do with him and didnt want to fight him, yet he did and folded. He hurt his own legacy imo. Though he was a great fighter at light heavyweight, he let boxing retire him. I always thought that a great champion was really found out after he suffers defeat in his ability to come back with his spirit unbroken and his confidence that made him champion still intact. Spinks failed at this.

[Trainer Monkey]

A fight I would have loved to have seen,him and Marvis Frazier at LHW,both of their natural weights. For financial reasons they both got shoe horned in to HW,and neither looked comfortable there

[CGM]

He is definately most remembered for the Tyson fight, but part of that is his own doing. He could have tried to rebound from the loss and prove his toughness by overcoming his first defeat. Or he just should have retired before fighting Tyson. He clearly wanted nothing to do with him and didnt want to fight him, yet he did and folded. He hurt his own legacy imo. Though he was a great fighter at light heavyweight, he let boxing retire him. I always thought that a great champion was really found out after he suffers defeat in his ability to come back with his spirit unbroken and his confidence that made him champion still intact. Spinks failed at this.

This I can't agree with. Spinks went as far as he could in the game, including taking Holmes title and winning the rematch. Then he lost against Tyson, well surprise surprise to that. Retiring at this point, after losing, says nothing about his championship heart, or his toughness. Would you say the same about Hagler? He dominated against the LHWs, moved on to bigger challenges with the heavyweights, and came up short against the best fighter in the game at that time, and called it a day with his marbles still relatively intact. Anything he does after Tyson is an anticlimax. At least he didn't linger. Respect for taking his best shot and knowing when to hang up the gloves.

[Boom Boom]

He is definately most remembered for the Tyson fight, but part of that is his own doing. He could have tried to rebound from the loss and prove his toughness by overcoming his first defeat. Or he just should have retired before fighting Tyson. He clearly wanted nothing to do with him and didnt want to fight him, yet he did and folded. He hurt his own legacy imo. Though he was a great fighter at light heavyweight, he let boxing retire him. I always thought that a great champion was really found out after he suffers defeat in his ability to come back with his spirit unbroken and his confidence that made him champion still intact. Spinks failed at this.

This I can't agree with. Spinks went as far as he could in the game, including taking Holmes title and winning the rematch. Then he lost against Tyson, well surprise surprise to that. Retiring at this point, after losing, says nothing about his championship heart, or his toughness. Would you say the same about Hagler? He dominated against the LHWs, moved on to bigger challenges with the heavyweights, and came up short against the best fighter in the game at that time, and called it a day with his marbles still relatively intact. Anything he does after Tyson is an anticlimax. At least he didn't linger. Respect for taking his best shot and knowing when to hang up the gloves.

Well that is the other way of looking at it. But some legacies arent looked at fairly, Im just making the argument as to why Spinks Legacy is looked at as it is by casual boxing fans. Yes I do think the same thing applies to Hagler, because that is the fight he is most remembered for. Spinks left some question marks by not rebounding from a loss. I dont think any fighter should be defined by one fight. but if Marciano lost his last fight and retired he wouldnt be remembered for his undefeated record, which he is, hed be remembered for his loss. If Ricky Hatton retired after losing to Mayweather, he would be remembered for that fight. But he moved on and now that fight is a memory that does not define him. The Tyson fight shouldnt define Spinks whole career, but it stands out. Thats the price of being undefeated and retiring on a loss I guess.

[CGM]

He is definately most remembered for the Tyson fight, but part of that is his own doing. He could have tried to rebound from the loss and prove his toughness by overcoming his first defeat. Or he just should have retired before fighting Tyson. He clearly wanted nothing to do with him and didnt want to fight him, yet he did and folded. He hurt his own legacy imo. Though he was a great fighter at light heavyweight, he let boxing retire him. I always thought that a great champion was really found out after he suffers defeat in his ability to come back with his spirit unbroken and his confidence that made him champion still intact. Spinks failed at this.

This I can't agree with. Spinks went as far as he could in the game, including taking Holmes title and winning the rematch. Then he lost against Tyson, well surprise surprise to that. Retiring at this point, after losing, says nothing about his championship heart, or his toughness. Would you say the same about Hagler? He dominated against the LHWs, moved on to bigger challenges with the heavyweights, and came up short against the best fighter in the game at that time, and called it a day with his marbles still relatively intact. Anything he does after Tyson is an anticlimax. At least he didn't linger. Respect for taking his best shot and knowing when to hang up the gloves.

Well that is the other way of looking at it. But some legacies arent looked at fairly, Im just making the argument as to why Spinks Legacy is looked at as it is by casual boxing fans. Yes I do think the same thing applies to Hagler, because that is the fight he is most remembered for. Spinks left some question marks by not rebounding from a loss. I dont think any fighter should be defined by one fight. but if Marciano lost his last fight and retired he wouldnt be remembered for his undefeated record, which he is, hed be remembered for his loss. If Ricky Hatton retired after losing to Mayweather, he would be remembered for that fight. But he moved on and now that fight is a memory that does not define him. The Tyson fight shouldnt define Spinks whole career, but it stands out. Thats the price of being undefeated and retiring on a loss I guess.

Sure people remember the losses of Spinks and Hagler, but to suggest they are most remembered by those fights is really a questonable and pointles statement. Maybe you forget these guys had already proven themselves with long championship careers. Hagler couldn't get a rematch. Spinks knew he was no match for Tyson. I don't know about you, but I'm kinda glad boxers don't stickhandle their careers in order to satisfy the casual fans who wouldn't know or care about Marvin Hagler if he hadn't lost to Leonard. Guess what? Hagler fights a couple more years, to the casual fan he's still the guy who lost to Leonard. Spinks fights on, the casual fan still says he was no Tyson, which he wasn't anyway.

[Master]

Foster lost at heavyweight and I do not think his legacy was hurt, so do not think Spinks is hurt at losing to Tyson. Better to have tried and lost than not tried at all and live the rest of your life wondering.

[Boom Boom]

Im not disagreeing with what any of you are saying but when you mention Spinks 9 out of 10 people will immediately think of Tyson. Thats just the way it is as fair or unfair as it is. It was also his biggest fight. The magnitude of the event oershadowed many of his great defences prior to that night. Thats all im saying. I have no problem with any fighter retiring at any time they feel is right.

[CGM]

OK bud. Point taken. It's kinda funny how that goes isn't it? You take many great fighters, and you realize that their biggest fights are losses. Arguello to Pryor, Gomez to Sanchez. Foreman to Ali. Hatton to Mayweather. Spinks to Tyson. The list goes on. They weren't the biggest fights because they lost, rather they lost because it was their biggest fight, against their toughest opponent.