Michael Moorer vs the Baer Brothers

I don't get the criticism of Buddy Baer. He was huge, strong and durable. Fighters like him always did extremely well in any era.

 

Please don't ever compare Micheal Moorer to Joe Louis!

I get it that Moorer was a damn fine fighter, but who did he actually stop at heavyweight?

Why would you expect him to be a threat to any heavyweight with an all time chin based upon his power?

 

I would have given him a very good chance of holding a belt a few years back, when there were softer belts to target.

For example I would have him as a strong favorite over Charles Martin.

 

Max was wildly inconsistent, but he had nice wins over Risko, Schaff, Schmeling, Carnera, Farr and Galento.They weren't terrible at all and some of them were arguably as good as Moorer.

 

You're comparing 5-11, 190 pound hamandeggers who lost over a third of their fights to a 6-2, 220, 78" reach Kronk-engineered, triphammer punching, fast-twitch mad man.... that really doesn't do your case any favors.

 

I can't tell if these guys just have no concept of boxing skill/technique/athleticism or if there is a racial bias to their argument? I don't understand how anybody can look at video of Michael Moorer in the ring and then compare him to the Baers, Galento, Schmeling, etc.? I hope that it is just ignorance of boxing skills and not racial bias.

 

There is always option C.

You don't know everything John Snow!

 

And he would lose to a top contender from a better era

 

Like Charles Martin say?

 

I meant Moorer specifically, but sure. I don't think Buddy would've survived that shot which iced Washington.

Your point is poor, though. Martin was never the number 1 contender, and this era isn't better than that one.

 

58 fights...51 wins...47 KO's...7 losses...