Michael Moorer is one of the most offensively skilled HW champions of all time

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying he's an ATG HW.

He certainly had flaws: suspect chin, and far from perfect defense.

But in terms of offensive skills, the guy had it all:
- great jab
- great right hook (probably his signature punch)
- excellent straight left as well as left hook
- nice uppercuts from both hands
- fast hands
- excellent timing and counterpunching skills
- he threw very crisp, compact and quick combinations.

Here are Moorer's early HW fights when he looks as crisp as ever.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Great boxer. If only he had a better chin.

 

Forgot how entertaining the cooper fight was.

 

This is the Moorer I like. Dude was deadly but after the Cooper slugfest Steward needed to fix the issue.

 

Yes I agree. Most successful LHW at HW of the past 70 years. Only reason he's not considered the 3rd best HW of the 90s is Holyfield got a title shot coming off 3 losses in 7 fights. Moorer lost 2 in 40 and that was the ballgame.

Moorer fought well against Foreman and Holyfield in his losses. The first one he got caught. The second one was the best fight of Holys career. Moorer came back from a KD to beat Holy the first time and only didn't the 2nd time because Holyfield had automatic power he never otherwise showed at HW. Moorer won the first two rounds and fought well, Holyfield was just on drug induced fire. The Holyfield that beat Moorer would have beaten Lennox.

The fact it took so many KDs for Holyfield to put down Moorer shows his chin in fact doesn't suck. He came back from all his other KD's except Foreman in his career proper. Tua is the first relevant HW Moorer had fought in 5 years and he was at his peak. Moorers 2nd career shouldn't be held against him. Coming back from a few years is harder to overcome than age.

 

He was very smooth in the mid-range. He had an excellent jab, very fluid combinations, good counters, etc. He would take methodical short steps forward and backwards to land his shot and make his opponent miss to land his own counters. But he either wouldn't or couldn't adapt to using a long-range gameplan when it was in his best interests. He was not fleet footed enough and intelligent enough to use an effective stick and move gameplan against superior punchers. He had good in and out movement, but his lateral movement sucked. It seemed to me that he was really good at his particular style, but it was the only style that he could really fight with.

 

Michael Spinks could beat everyone Moorer beat at heavyweight, including the version of Holyfield that Moorer beat @HistoryZero26

 

Moorer could have beaten Holmes, Tangstad, Cooney and Tyson. He'd certainly do better in that 5 fight stretch than Spinks did. He'd beat Holmes more clearly and not get killed by Tyson in 90 seconds.

Would Spinks do better than Moorer against Holyfield, Foreman, Schulz, Botha,Bean, Holyfield? No he would not.

 

Moorer wouldn't have come close to beating a 1988 rendition of Mike Tyson. And yes, Spinks could beat all the names on your list, including 45 year old Foreman. The Holyfield of the 1st Moorer fight could have been taken by Spinks almost certainly. Spinks said it himself that he didn't know why Moorer stood in front of Foreman. Which says Spinks would have been on the move and Foreman at that point was too slow to keep up with a mobile Spinks. Spinks wouldn't have stopped 45 year old Foreman but soundly outpointed him. Moorer got flattened by 45 year old Foreman. Maybe he beats 35/36 year old Holmes. Maybe not.

 

Moorer was soundly outpointing Foreman. Moorer was complacent because things were going well. He'd won the last 5 rounds in a row he was not expecting to get slept by a jab. Holyfield survived Foreman because he appreciated the gravity of his situation. Moorer wasn't in emergency mode. Foreman needed 2 KDs and the last 3 rounds to win the fight.

If Holyfield put Spinks down early that is the end. There's not going to be a comeback there.

 

But it's unlikely he puts Spinks away early. Just because prime Tyson did it doesn't mean any heavyweight can do it. Tyson possessed punching power Holyfield didn't have and a much more aggressive style. I don't think Moorer or any other light heavyweight moving north last long against prime Mike Tyson.

 

1988 Tyson obliterates Moorer.

Moorer was used to being the faster man, which he wouldn't be against a prime Mike. Lennox and Holyfield beat on Tyson and he wasn't deterred, taking them into later rounds and they hit harder than Moorer.

Moorer gets slept within six with his chin, maybe sooner.

 

About time someone appreciated Moorer's skill. But he would stay in the pocket too long and he never passed up on a firefight when his boxing skills would have served him better. Still, the guy gets underrated. He was a really potent force based on his handspeed and high level offensive game. I think he just got too used to plowing through guys at 175 and that mentality backfired on him at heavyweight.

 

Great post. Moorer is seriously underrated. Loved his hook and he had a solid left hand too. His jab, as you said, was very heavy.

 

I too think Moorer is underrated. It is mostly based on his loss to old Foreman and a relatively thin resume at HW. But anyone can see how many offensive tools he had. He was genuinely skilled.