Yes , just like Tyson's most notable victory over Larry Holmes ... However I will say At least Charles , Louis , and Moore all showed up in shape without their guts hanging all over the place like Holmes showed up for Tyson.
Spinks ? :: :: Same difference bro , only Marciano had no real size advantage ... Exactly :clap: :clap:
Spinks was the linear heavyweight champion. Durelle wasn't even in the division. You're trying to use Moore's accomplishments at Lt. Heavy in a thread about heavweights. That's ridiculous.
What the fuck are you talking about ??? You crack on Marciano because he beat Moore who then moved back to Lt heavy but refuse to acknowledge that one of Tyson's notable wins was over Lt Heavy Spinks ..:: Then you state "Moore did shit at Heavy after Marciano" - well muther fucker , neither did Spinks after Tyson ... Get what I'm sayin ? You are not thinking clearly here. You can't build up Tyson with the same exact shit you are breaking Marciano down with .... Do you not understand this ?
Spinks was the linear heavyweight champion. How is he not a heavyweight? When was Moore ever the linear heavyweight champion? Moore's career at heavyweight was beatings and losses.
Doesn't matter , Spinks was a Lt heavy fighter ... Also if this trivial Linear champ thing is your reason to build up Tyson and break down Marciano for the very same circumstances , thats fuckin ridiculous and it makes it look like you are grasping for for anything just to attempt to hold your own in this debate ...
No, Spinks was a heavyweight when Tyson beat him in 1 round. Spinks had beaten Holmes for the championship and destroyed Cooney who has a legit contender at the time. He hadn't fought at light heavyweight for 3 years by the time he fought Tyson. I have no need to break down Marciano or build up Tyson. I'm just showing the facts that Marciano's entire career is basically defined on beating old men one of which was a spectacular light heavy but a crappy heavyweight. Michael Spinks was at least a legit heavyweight who was actually a legit heavyweight champion. Moore didn't even sniff a heavyweight title belt.
this debate can go wherever ud like, but to diminish Tyson for Spinks in the name of marciano is ridiculous. If it wasn't for former lt. heavyweights, Marciano would have how many defenses exactly? Spinks is the best Lt. Heavy of all time, he "beat" Larry Holmes and his undefeated record, and Tyson destroyed him.
Moore beat 4 of the top 10 ranked heavyweights including Nino Valdez twice to get a shot at Marciano WHILE still hanging onto his LH title.
Yeah and ? Moore and Marciano were the same size when Marciano beat him .... Bottom line , Tysons 2 biggest victories were over and OLD FAT BELLIED out of shape , near 40 year old man and the other was over a former Lt Heavyweight that was showing signs of slipping ... Whatever , that is fine with me but , you can't discredit Marciano's victories and call his opponents old or Lt heavyweights and then try to justify Tysons two notable wins I mention above ... It makes you look like an ass ....
Spinks was only 31 and Tyson outweighed him by only 6 pounds. Spinks also had 3 inches in height and reach. He was THE heavyweight champion when he won the title and the linear heavyweight champ when he and Tyson tangled. Holmes went on to beat Mercer, and fight twice in competitive bouts for the championship against Holyfield and Mccall. When was Moore ever even close to being a legit champ at Heavyweight? Like I said, his heavyweight career was beatings and losses. Marciano's career was built on Moore, Charles, Walcott, and Louis. Those guys were all shot and done as heavyweights by the time Marciano got to them. The same can't be said about Spinks or Holmes. Marciano doesn't have even one name on his resume that compares to Spinks or Holmes.
I noticed you left out the rest of my quote. That shows how badly you need to grasp for straws, misquoting me and such. What I said was: Surely you don't think beating up on near 40 year old Louis, and Moore means more than beating 31 year old linear heavyweight champion Michael Spinks?
You are grasping again ... Who cares if Tyson only outweighed him by 6 pounds ??? Do you think Rocky had a size advantage over Moore or Ezzaed Charles ?? Again , you are shot down .. Spinks beat an aged , fat , not in good shape Larry Holmes and some will dispute the SPLIT DECISION because some people think he lost that fight. Jerry Cooney ??? He fought Spinks 5 years after the Holmes fight and it was a well know fact HE WAS SHOT after he fought Holmes ... After Tyson , Spinks retired and never did anything at Heavyweight ... Ezzard Charles is just a credible win as Spinks who came into the ring ALREADY defeated and intimidated .... Charles came to fight , not lay down like Spinks did .. Fuckin Joe Louis and Joe Walcott were the same age when they fought Marciano as the fat slob Larry Holmes was when he fought Tyson ... Not to mention Walcott & Louis were in decent shape and didn't have their guts hanging over the sides of their boxing trunks ... If you discredit Louis & Walcott ( 2 fighters between 210 and 220 lbs "skinny" ) , you must discredit fat Holmes ! If you discredit Ezzard Charles & Archie Moore neither of whom Marciano had any size or reach advantage over, you must discredit Spinks as well !
Louis and Walcott were done as fighters when Marciano got to them. They did shit after Marciano beat their old asses up. Holmes went on to beat Ray Mercer, and be competitive with Evander Holyfield and Oliver McCall. Charles hadn't touched the heavyweight title in years, Moore was never the World Heavyweight champion. Spinks WAS the linear heavyweight champ when Tyson fought him. Big difference.
There, fixed it for you! P.S. Dont forget about Holmes' victory over Erik Esch... Holmes preparation for Tyson? 0-2 Louis prep for Marciano? 8 fight win streak
Give me a fuckin break .... Holmes beat Mercer .... So , he had 1 decent fight left .... He CLEARLY lost to McCall and Holyfield ... He did NOTHING ... He showed up fat & old Vs Tyson , fat as hell with his gut hanging all over the place ..... I'm not saying that Louis or Walcott did anything after , they opted to retire ... However at least when they fought Marciano , they showed up in shape and ready to fight ... Holmes showed up like he just came from an all night buffet ... They fuckin guy couldn't even breath for god sake ... As far as Spinks having a title , like I said , he fought an aged out of shape Holmes and had an SD and many people thought he lost that fight. As far as Cooney , C'mon man ... The fuckin guy was completely shot. Why even mention his name at that point in time ? Whatever , I just find it hilarious that you can Justify one guys record and break down anothers for the very same exact reasons ... It doesn't make sense - well unless you just hate on one fighter. In this case it just happens to be Marciano ... Like I said , Tysons notable wins - Scared stiff Spinks & Fat old slob Larry Holmes with rolls of fat hanging all over the place is NOT better then Marciano's notable wins in Walcott X2 , Charles X2 , Moore , Louis regardless of their age or weight because Spinks & Holmes were in the same situation Vs Tyson as those guys were Vs Marciano ...
Even if I do concede that the competition is even, Tyson destroyed his competition and Marciano managed to get dumped and put on queer street by Walcott. He also got dumped by old ass Moore. I'm have no personal stake in this battle like Rocco. I'm just looking at this objectively and Marciano made his career beating up old men. If Rocky had sacked up and fought Patterson instead of retiring, maybe we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Cus D'Amato and Marciano's management were discussing a potential fight between the two in 1956. Marciano bitched out and called it a day ala Lennox Lewis.
Yeah , lets drop this ... It's getting a bit old ... I bet though if Rocky could only have seen the future and new what Pattersons chin was going to be like at Heavyweight , he probably would have came out of retirement for 1 last fight ... ::
That's just a boxing question, and a serious one. Spinks was SHOT when he fought Tyson. How could he beat Rocky Marciano, when Archie Moore, who was better than Spinks, couldn't?
I don't agree that the Moore that fought Marciano was better than the Spinks that fought Tyson. Moore was only an above average heavyweight at best when he was younger, near his 40s he was far gone (he still dropped Marciano). Spinks was only 31 and had fought Holmes (top 5 heavyweight all-time) and beat him only 2 years before. I think the Spinks that fought Tyson would give Marciano fits and stop him on cuts or eventually just TKO him.
Dumbass. Archie Moore was the #1 heavyweight for years and years. He's usually ranked as one of the 50, if not 40 or 30 greatest heavyweights of all time. Michael Spinks was lucky in both fights, against a Holmes who was as old as Ali was when Leon Spinks beat him. Two years later, he was nagged by injuries and inaction. He hadn't faced a top-10 heavyweight since "beating" Holmes. He had no legs, and no gameplan to face Tyson. He simply slapped his gloves together and walked forward the way he did in every other fight. Archie Moore was one of the smartest fighters who ever lived, and the whole Spinks family ranks among the dumbest.
Probably by KO 1. To suggest that Moore was ever in the top "30" all-time of heavyweights is telling about the author.
