Max Baer vs Tommy Morrison

I wouldn’t disagree with any of that.

 

I see Morrison putting Baer's lights out with a left hook

 

Oh geez, the Duke is getting knock out brutally as soon as Baer goes to work.

 

Baer was awkward enough with his punches to catch Morrison in a shootout.

Baer would be losing on points to the more polished Morrison, but I believe Baer had about the same chin as Foreman and would weather a Morrison storm.

Baer would KO Morrison late.

 

You can make a solid case for either, as both were quintessentially the dangerous/inconsistent type. I would pick Morrison to win two out of three, being quicker, heavier, and a better combination thrower.

 

I think Baer was naturally bigger. Tommy was just roided out.

 

Could go either way but I like Baer based on chin ..

 

i think Morrison wallops Baer, who has never really impressed me much with his wild swings and slow feet.

 

Nobody is putting Baer's lights out with a left hook.

He arguably have the best chin of all of the lineal heavyweight champions.

 

Someone remind me who exactly Morrison ever KO'd...

 

News: Morrison was about 20lb heavier than Baer...He's only got 3 losses compared to Baer's 13 losses.


About these claims: the closest to the truth is the weight difference, only slightly exaggerated.
Though here is a quote from this website & a thread about measurements:
"If you look at someone like Max Baer, his overall measurements - with the exception of the upper leg - compare very favourably with modern heavyweights. The same applies to James J. Jeffries and quite a few others from the pre-Liston era".


Besides being slighty taller with a somewhat longer reach, Morrison was pumped up: & took steroids.
In ffact, someone claimed on this website that Morrison said he was naturally 190 lbs. without the juice!
But either way, Baer would not be physically overmatched.

Also,it is cherry picking to list total losses, & not note Baer's somewhat greater number of victories: 66, the same as Joe Louis.

Fine to pick Tommy Gunn: just be accurate & more complete with the facts.

 

I have no idea why anyone would favor Morrison over a durable puncher like Baer.

 

Technique, speed, punch variety, an actual jab, power, actual defence, workrate, movement ...

 

If you want to slate Tommy for being on the juice, fair enough. To me he looks physically larger and stronger than Baer. If that's due to magic pills then I can't say how he would have been without them.

Sure, there are other facts that can be looked at:

Tommy lost to Lewis and Mercer who were world class, and Bentt, who, despite his short career, was pretty good. You could argue Ross the Boss should have beaten him too. Puritty has some exceptional qualities and could be a handful for any heavyweight stupid enough to slug with him.

Baer lost to guys like McCarthy and Abbott thans to his in-ring antics. He lacked discipline. He lost to relative nobodies like Kennedy, Risko and Davies, guys Morrison would flatten on his worst night. And he also lost to the top tier guys like Louis and Uzcudun. He's far from unbeatable even by the standards of ordinary opposition.

But Tommy is not ordinary. He has an 81% KO rate against stiffer opposition on average than Baer faced.

Frankly all this stats comparison stuff bores me though.

I look at the footage.

One is a modern heavyweight with the size, technique and power that goes with it.

The other is an exceptional athlete for his time, with woeful technique, poor discipline and erratic fighting habits.

It seems obvious who ought to be favoured.

 

And hes getting plastered as soon as Max lures him into a corner.

Max is faster on his feet and better conditioned than Morrison. He is far more durable, with a massive reach advantage, and knows how to utilize his physical attritbutes to beat more skillful fighters.

This isnt a 45 year old Foreman, Max will be able to pressure Tommy at will for 12 rounds.