[Jersey-Jim]

Changes to Michael Spinks ratings


1. A TKO rating of 1
That number is reserved for those who could soak up inhuman amouts of punishement like a Tex Cobb or Jake LaMotta. Even a Marvin Hagler or Rocky Marciano who could walk through bombs and still be firing away. Does that sound like Michael Spinks? A 2 would be much more realistic.

2. A chin rating of 1
Again, Michael Spinks was rocked throughout his career and flattened against Tyson. Although that was at Heavyweight, it's very hard to see him having at Light Heavyweight, a better chin than, let's say - Larry Holmes did at Heavyweight. He didn't exactly face any Archie Moore's, Ezzard Charles's, Bob Fosters, Gene Tunney's, Harry Greb's, etc. during his reign. Rating him amongst the all-time fighters, I give him a 2 for his chin and a knockout rating of 1. Still excellent and more realistic.

I wouldn't doubt if Marvin Hagler had defeated him had he risen in weight. Hagler was great against tall, ranging guys like Spinks who liked to fight on the outside. Spinks had a big right hand, but if Hagler could take it, then he'd really have his hands full.

Adjusting the two ratings mentioned above, at least from where I'm sitting, creates a more accurate version of the real Michael Spinks.

Rating Michael Spinks who only fought 32 times as a 14 along with fighters like Gene Tunney (86 fights) and Archie Moore (200+) who fought some of the greatest fighters ever to lace up the gloves seems a bit imbalanced.

If Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore or Bob Foster – fighters with skill are power beyond David Sears, Willie Edwards or Eddie Mustapha Muhammad nailed Spinks solidly at Light Heavyweight, I see him not faring all that much better than he did when Tyson nailed him at Heavyweight. The difference being, he could probably get up at least once. The changes listed in this post drop Spink's overall rating from a 14 to a 13 - equal to Ezzard Charles and many other Light Heavyweight Greats.