Page 2 of 2

Posted: May 21 07, 5:42 am
by Socnorb11
G. Keenan wrote:
Socnorb11 wrote:
G. Keenan wrote:
Socnorb11 wrote:I just watched it.

REALLY bad fight. I feel sorry for the folks that paid good money for tickets.

I was hoping Spinks would win, but it's hard to respect a guy like him that refuses to fight, and just runs all night.......
As I understood it Taylor's camp had offered that fight to many people before Spinks. If I'm Spinks and someone offers me a bunch of money to fight a guy I know I don't match up well against I'd do the exact same thing. No way does Taylor actually way only 160 lbs and no way can Spinks out-punch him. I thought he had pretty good strategy all things considered: counter-punch against a slower fighter and hope to steal the title.
I don't necessarily disagree that it was a solid strategy to keep from getting knocked out, but there was no way he was going to win the fight like that, so what's the point?

Spinks will have a hard time getting another lucrative payday, simply because boxing fans likely won't pay to watch him fight again.
You're right. That one judge did give it to Spinks 117-111, which prompted Lampley to say that he should never be allowed to judge again. That cracked me up.
Yup. I love the bluntness of the boxing analysists.......... especially Lampley.

Posted: May 21 07, 10:39 am
by robbotis
That fight was a bore. Spinks can't hurt a fly.
But what about the Undercard? That was the fight.
Pavlik is the man.

Posted: May 21 07, 4:16 pm
by Blitzer
robbotis wrote:That fight was a bore. Spinks can't hurt a fly.
But what about the Undercard? That was the fight.
Pavlik is the man.
Yeah Pavlik definitely put on a show. That was a much better fight than the latter.

Spinks' style is effective, but VERY boring. The way he fought was the best chance he had at beating Taylor. Though I did feel quite bored watching Taylor swat away the punches as if they were merely an annoying knat at a BBQ.


Blitzer