It's 1994 and moorer decides to fight Holmes instead of foreman

No Holmes didn't have the same type of power, it would be a boxing contest that Holmes would look better than Foreman for many of the rounds but Moorer wins more

Holmes beats Foreman though

 

I dont see 94 holmes getting the win..but you never know.

 

Skills wise he's pretty good, not the most durable and could be lazy. He could have been allot better, not in the same bracket as the top guys from the top 90s guys mainly due to durability. He'd do much better in an era of smaller guys.

I rate him higher than Berbick and Cooney on achievement and he's got a much better package than Berbick. Cooney may beat him with his size and power, but I'm not sure Cooney's sort of an unproven and untested. 80s wise maybe he's more comparable to Spinks?

But anyway we're talking a world class prime guy against a 40 something fat guy, prime guy wins a boxing match, an outside chance the fat guy lands a hayemaker, which Foreman did, inbetween losing to Morrison and Schulz. Around this time Holmes lost to McCall

Why do you think Moorer is a mentally weak bully? I think you have to have some bottle to dethrone Holyfield

 

i am from around 50 miles from where moorer (ok moorer not moore..but who gives a ****) grew up...he was known as being a bully in many ways.


he tended to get lazy in fights all the time.....he barely beat holyfield..in the rounds that holy did almost nothing..moorer would do almost nothing..he had teddy screaming at him to do moorer..and he still just barely managed to do enough.

clearly holyfield wasnt shot as people though, but he was definitely not his best that night..far from it...and moorer didnt do much to take advantage.

 

It would depend on a few things, but it'd have been a very competitive fight.


First is most obvious; how the fighters show up.


In his keep busy fights in the 1990s, Holmes would usually show up in the 240s and unmotivated, but he showed up at 233 and 236 for his 2 title shots in the 90s. He'd show up at about the same weight for Moorer assuming he trained as hard as I think he would.


Moorer would show up in good condition with Atlas running his camp. Moorer looked sharp in his fight against Foreman and would have given most heavyweights at that time a lot of problems if he showed up like he did against Foreman.


Second is the gameplan.


Holmes was a very smart fighter and was always very good at ad******g midfight if his original gameplan wasn't working out how he wanted. He was a smarter fighter than Moorer and had more tricks to trouble Moorer with than vice versa. At this point in his career, Holmes knew what he could and could not do, and had adjusted to his decline accordingly.

Moorer would not be the main intellectual challenge for Holmes to overcome in the ring, Holmes's biggest challenge would be to stay a step ahead of Atlas. Atlas always prepared good gameplans and is good at seeing when to step the pressure up or when to be careful. Against Foreman, Atlas warned Moorer exactly of what Foreman was going to look to do (and ultimately did) and devised a plan around it. Unfortunately for Atlas and Moorer, Moorer decided to ignore the plan for a bit and got knocked out because of it.

Third is their physical advantages/disadvantages.

Holmes is bigger than Moorer. At 6'3 1/2 - 6'4, Holmes was a pretty big man and had an 80"-81" reach to go along with his already taller than usual body. He was also a natural heavyweight.


Moorer at 6'2 wasn't short, but he bulked up to get to heavyweight. He did carry his power up pretty well, though, which is good.

Holmes obviously was not as fast at 45 years old in 1994 as he was at 30-31 in 1979/1980. He was still pretty quick when he was focussed, though. He knew how to land punches and he knew how much he could still move around and how quick or slowly he'd be doing it. His jab was still top of the line and up until 1996/1997 it's arguable he still had the best jab in the heavyweight division, which could be used to give Moorer a lot of trouble.

His chin was top of the line, he was never dropped in his 1990s comeback and he had fought punchers like Mercer, Holyfield, and McCall. I don't see Moorer dropping him when Mercer, Holyfield, and McCall couldn't.

He still had good power, along the same lines as Holyfield. Not a massive puncher but would do damage when landing clean.

Moorer, being a southpaw and also having a good jab, could definitely give Holmes trouble with it. Especially because he was nearly 20 years younger than Holmes and could use his youth to make his jab and combinations more busy to build up points.

What makes this fight interesting, in my opinion, is that Moorer's chin was vulnerable at heavyweight and he was hittable. Holmes was older so he'd have a lot more trouble captializing on the openings he saw, but he could still whack and he had a knack for making people look bad while making himself look good. Even while he was getting outworked by Holyfield he was landing some very crisp right hands that may have decked Moorer for a flash knockdown. He hit McCall with some rights that would've knocked most people out.

Basically, I see it being a battle of the jabs and a battle to see if Moorer can get his combinations going to outwork Holmes, or if Holmes can keep Moorer at bay with his jab and drive home his straight right to do damage.

I honestly see it as a 50/50 fight in 1994/1995.

 

Holmes wouldn't be able to out jab Moorer at this stage of their careers, let alone outbox him. Holmes retreats from Moorer all night long with limited success, but makes it look ugly enough to stay competitive. 117-111 UD for MM

 

My evaluation of moorer has improved recently.

I think at that point in time a knockout is the only way to beat him. Noone round that year had the skills needed to out box him. Bowe and Lewis likely stop him but that aside I don't think anyone beats him.

 

I'd give 94 Holmes a chance against the title winning Moorer, but MM looked utterly fantastic for 9 rounds against Foreman.

I frankly think Holmes doesn't have a chance against the Moorer. Too old, too slow, fought too lazy, and his power was gone. Moorer would outjab him, run him around, and score those hard, sharp shots.

If you told me for sure that the Moorer from the Foreman fight shows and it's against the Holmes from McCall, I'd bet a grand on Moorer.

 

Holmes was too lazy and slow by that time. He wouldn't be busy enough and wouldn't win enough rounds. He'd probably go the distance, but he'd lose a lopsided decision. Moorer was pretty sharp.

 

Why the hell would Larry fight Moorer in 94!?...Thats just dumb.

 

Probably not, and I also think Moorer would beat Foreman about 4/5 times.

 

holmes was smart enough to hustle some rounds but ultimately moorer gets the decison maybe

would look something like 117-113

possibly a knock down or standing 8 count coming late