Which was more impressive. Holmes win over Ray Mercer or Foreman's win over Michael Moorer

I think Holmes was more impressive but Foreman's was more dramatic ... George was getting beaten pretty harshly all fight and then landed .. Holmes fought a Mercer that was coming off a huge win, was expected to murder him , was still undefeated and surgically diced him uo over 12 rounds .. both terrific achievements.

 

Foreman's, for three reasons: he was older than Holmes was, Moorer was better than Mercer (close, though), and it was for the title.

Don't really know why you'd pick Holmes' TBH.

 

I love Holmes win over Mercer and a great accomplishment for Holmes at that stage of his career, but ill go with Foreman as he KOd the lineal undefeated World champion who just beat Holyfield.

 

Foremans, mercer wasnt motivated for the holmes fight. He could get lazy.

 

mercer stops moorer. As soon as he found his range with his jab itd be over.

 

Think I might go against the grain here and pick Larry.

Foreman's win is obviously more historically significant and prestigious. But in terms of the actual performance and spectacle I'd go with Holmes'. There was always a chance that Foreman could land the money punch on Moorer, even at 45 years of age. Whereas I don't think many could have envisioned Holmes, aged 42, with no legs left and having fought nothing but ham and eggers in the previous couple of years (Foreman was comparatively well run-in by the time he faced Moorer, having fought a better level of competition in the couple of years prior) beating Mercer the way he did.

Sure, Mercer wasn't a great boxer as Damiani had shown for long periods (and as he half-admitted himself with his rueful comment that he had to "learn how to box now" after losing to Holmes), but it was still a masterclass from Larry, particularly in the way he adapted. Tried moving and keeping it long for a couple of rounds, quickly realised he probably didn't have the legs to do that, so switched to a bit of his own rope-a-dope and completely clowned Mercer from then on. Gave Mercer no momentum to work with, read him like a book and had him expending so much energy that it was actually Holmes who looked the fresher man down the stretch.

Obviously Foreman deserves his props for resolutely keeping chopping away at Moorer, and he did set that right hand up...But Holmes' performance had that extra bit of all-round class and makes for the better spectacle. I also don't rate Moorer as highly as a lot of others do, particularly at Heavyweight, which might cloud my judgement I guess.

 

That's how I see it ..

 

Moorer. Holmes' win would have gained him a lot of accolades had Mercer NOT vacated his WBO belt right before the fight.

Holmes deserved to be a two-time champ, that fight should have been sanctioned.

What George did is beyond belief. Moorer was an undefeated, multiple belt champion. He beat the best heavy in the world at the time imo. Holy was above both Bowe and Lewis. George got beat by Holy. Middle aged man wins the most prestigious boxing belt. Wow.

All that said, Holmes' performance against Mercer was deserving of the title brilliant.

 

Holmes by a mile! I'm talking the performance. Larry schooled Ray. Foreman was getting beat most of the night, but the way he knocked out Mike was beautiful,I could actually see it coming, the setup for the right hand was getting closer and closer. Larry performance was much more impressive though, two top guys, Moorer and Ray, I don't care about who had a belt or not, I'm looking at the peformence

 

I picked the Holmes fight because Larry looked more impressive throughout the Mercer fight. George was losing on the cards in his, but his finish was far more dramatic as someone previously wrote.

 

Ya 100%

 

Foreman played Moorer

Foreman used his wits to defeat Moorer and took a page out of Ali's book on outsmarting your opponent ... Learned from his defeat at the hands of Ali

That's more impressive than what Holmes in my reckoning

 

About equal.

Foreman's victory was more historic, obviously.

I like the Holmes victory more, however. He just seemed to dissect Mercer so completely, and seemed to relish doing it. He was in his element that day.

 

I’m Team Larry all the way as far as who I like better (although I also really like Big George and cook steaks on a Foreman Grill, haha), but I want to point this out about George’s win:

When you listen to George on commentary, you can learn more about how he thinks than about the fight he’s calling: “If he lands just one left hook, he can end this fight” he might say about a guy who has shown no inclination to be able to hurt the other guy and is on the wrong end of a tail-kicking ... but that’s how George thinks, because HE was always one punch away. And I think during his fights he would be telling himself, ‘If I can just walk this guy into one good right hand, I win.”

That’s how he approached the Moorer fight.

Read his autobiography (aptly titled “By George”) and on this fight he talks a lot about what a jab does — how if you keep snapping a guy’s head back with the jab, the head is at the top of the neck and it sends a shock wave down their spine through their nervous system. Over the course of several rounds, a repeated, thudding jab (George believes, and I do too) landing breaks a fighter down by lessening his punch resistance via the shocks to the nervous system (all the way down to the legs). And George went in with a plan to:

A) Break down Moorer with the jab because he didn’t think he could just overpower him like some others; and

B) Sucker him into the big right hand by kind of lollipopping less powerful rights so as to make Moorer think that his power wasn’t all that (the way Holyfield, for instance, respected it).

Eventually, he could wear him down and find the range with the jab, and then bring home the short, wrecking ball right to win it.

And it went exactly like that.

If George goes out throwing bombs, Moorer covers and evades and lets Foreman blow off his steam and then it’s all Moorer once George loses his snap.

Instead, he had to lull him into a false sense of security while steadily setting him up with the jab, set the trap and lower the boom.

The winning punch traveled I’d estimate maybe 18 inches. And it tore Moorer’s mouth up so bad he had to have 36 stitches on the inside of his mouth after to sew it back up.

Imagine the power to do that with one short punch. It’s like a concentrated car wreck right to the kisser.

So I think George fought a brilliant fight. He assessed what it would take to beat this guy, conceded it wasn’t going to happen by him winning a decision by out-boxing or out-working Moorer, and then committed to a very clever approach that resulted in the exact way he could win it.