I was very impressed with Kovalev's performance against Pascal over the weekend and not only that performances but just him overall as a fighter. I feel possibly that he could be a top 10 light heavyweight all time. Will have to see as he continues fight top opposition but the way he has blown a way a number of very legit contenders leads me to believe he may be something special. But the same could've been said about Michael Moorer.. I've always been a big fan of Michael Moorer as a fighter. He was very technically sound with some of the most short crisp punches I've ever seen from a big man. At light heavyweight he looked pretty much unstoppable. He faced a number of solid opponents but no one really special at all to prove just how dominate of a light heavyweight he was. Personally I feel had he got his shot against say Virgil Hill or Prince Charles Williams the result would've been much like his other fights at light heavyweight I think Moorer would've devastated both of them.... Now to a match up between Kovalev and Moorer. I feel their power in comparable, maybe a slight edge to Kovalev who seems to hurt anything he touches but Moorer had the kinda power at light heavyweight to get anyone out of there as well. Chin is really hard to say, as neither have been or were ever really seriously hurt at light heavyweight. Moorer's chin was questioned as a heavyweight but it still held up good enough for him to capture multiple world titles and there is a huge difference between taking heavyweight punches and light heavyweights punches. Now where the difference would be I feel is in overall skill. Both guys are very skilled but I feel Moorer was more so. I think it would be a good competitive fight but Moorer would prevail with his crisp short combinations. I just see him overall getting the better of more of the exchanges and eventually breaking down Kovalev around the 8th. I also think Moorer at this stage in his career would have the determination to stick there with Kovalev and be technically sound enough not to take a shot good enough to knock him out. Only time will tell on how good Kovalev is and I think he is very good maybe even great but I think Moorer may have been even better.
H, very good ****ysis of this fantasy fight.Michael Moorer was great and a southpaw to boot, but he foolishly entered the heavyweight division where he became less effective. It has happened many times before starting with Gene Tunney, Jack Delaney, John Henry Lewis and of course the truly great lightheavyweight Ezzard Charles, who beat a great contingent of LHs, as Moore, Bivins etc. In Kovalev we have a tremendous puncher who I believe belongs with the elite LHs but his rivals of today are mediocre LHs at best. Not his fault though...Bob Foster too was a great LH knockout artist who failed as a heavyweight. All things considered most likely the best LH who became a great heavyweight was the sturdy, intelligent, punishing puncher Gene Tunney...Anf lest we forget the prime brilliant Billy Conn who lasted longer than any LH would have against a THIRTY POUND heavier and murderous punching Joe Louis, taking Joe to the 13th round before disaster struck. Billy was GREAT, and also beat a slew of good heavyweights...
I'm quite the fan of the Krusher too, and I have to agree with him..only ko in 4. Sergey is proving himself over and over to be the best. The guy is a legit badass...and Moorer, as good as he was, wouldn't know what hit him.
Well, I guess the question is this: Michael Moorer knocked out a Vassily Jirov who was much younger than he was, knocked out and undefeated Franz Botha, beat Evander Holyfield, and kicked George Foremans ass for 9 1/2 rounds. How would Kovalev do moving up to heavyweight to fight these guys? Foreman Holyfield Botha Jirov
lets keep it to lhw. unless you think moorer doesn't have the resume there to be taken serious.... against Sergey KRUSHER KOvalev. :think
how big was moorer at hw? 210-220lbs? and im sure he was young and grew into it. Sergey KRUSHER Kovalev is 31, he could fight at cruiser but not hw.