Michael Moorer Versus David Tua

That's why David Tua is an exciting fighter-you never know what to expect, especially when he's motivated.

Michael Moorer never learned his lesson, though. You don't stand in front of a puncher. That's what got him caught by Foreman, and it's what got him KTFO in this fight as well. I'd like to point out that it was the right hand of Tua that was the fatal blow in this one. LOL at Moorer's trainer. "OH.....DAYUM!!!"

 

Moorer was just a terribly unimaginative fighter.

 

In every thread there are a idiot who want to diminish the merit to other fighter.

 

And in evry thred der be idoit hoo dont kan tipe but wont to act lik deyre uthoritee figyer on bocksin.

 

i never did mention your name, but obviously you knew that you are the idiot.. so i am right on my comment

 

Michael Moorer had no business at heavyweight IMO. He was a great light heavy but left his legacy on the table and went up chasing that cheddar.

 

u dont can has bocksin rite!

 

That isn't true at all. He was having great difficulties making the weight, and wouldn't have done himself any favors attempting to stick around. He was always very wiry and gangly at Lt. Heavy, with little in the way of physical strength. He packed a big punch and little more. Hardly the stuff that makes a "great light heavy", in my opinion. At least he was more comfortable in his own body at Heavyweight, and grew to be a bit more refined once he'd realized his power couldn't bail him out of every situation.

 

errr... regarding the question at hand, i believe i won 1200 pounds on David dispatching him within 5 on this fight.

 

You're wrong on this one, buddy. Michael Moorer was not struggling at the weight, he clearly moved up because the division was dormant and he was chasing the money, fact! Moorer and his camp even admitted it themselves. He moved for that heavyweight money and because he thought there was nothing for him at light heavyweight.

It's just my opinion that Michael was a beast at 175lbs and he is underrated there because he only won the WBO title and the division was bland when he was there. He certainly could beat many of the top 10 light heavyweights on a given day.

Let me tell you this, Moorer gained almost 40lbs from his last light heavyweight fight and his first heavyweight fight. There was no need to move up so soon and you can't tell me that Moorer grew 40lbs in a month. I’m not saying he shouldn’t have made the move but looking back in hindsight the guy left his legacy on the table. He was so much better at 175, no disputing that IMHO.

 

Where did you hear these "facts"? I've never heard of anything like this before, and it doesn't seem to hold up seeing as he'd only won the WBO title and neglected to unify or face any of the top guys like Virgil Hill and co. Everything I've come across (along with sound logic) suggests he was struggling hard to make the weight, and his performances during his WBO reign don't really go against that view.

Sure, in any given era he might beat a few. I tend to think he's far more overrated at the weight than vice-versa. I was never impressed with him at Light Heavy, and he looked downright awful against washed up guys like Leslie Stewart and Frankie Swindell (hardly elite fighters in their own right). If he's struggling with those types, I don't care to even estimate his chances against the true greats of the division.

:huhShouldn't this kinda prove my point? The only people that would put on that kind of weight in such a short span of time are those so starved and dehydrated from losing water weight that they've hardly any of their natural muscle/strength remaining. Hence the term "weight-drained".

He looked a lot better against the completely dire opposition he was facing, I can't dispute that.:good

 

I remember reading about this in Ring magazine and thought it was a very risky move. Imagine if he stayed at 175?