One night of his entire career would be won by Douglas, the rest would be won by Moorer. That's too much concentration to expect from Douglas, and too much risk for me to bet on Douglas.
People often say this but it's simply not true, Douglas from 86-90 only lost 1 fight to Tony Tucker in which he was ahead on points. During this period he had standout performance vs Mike Williams in one of the best jabbing exhibitions of all time, and solid wins over named opponents like Page, Berbick, McCall. At any point during that period in Douglas's career he could beat Michael Moorer, Douglas wasn't only good for one night vs Tyson, he was good for a solid 4 year period during 86-90 up until Holyfield fight where he got fat and cashed out.
That’s sort of how I feel too. Michael wasn’t a “ great “ heavyweight but he seemed to be consistent. Had a nice balance of power, skill, speed and stamina. His chin was shaky but Douglas wasn’t exactly an elite puncher. Douglas at 100% might win a decision. But most of the time Moorer would have a good shot at winning
I agree. He may have been at his best for Tyson but this “Douglas was only good for one night” revision is hogwash.
If it's the Douglas that beat Tyson then him. Every other Douglas, then it's Moorer. Douglas was an enigma. If only he cared enough he could have been great.
Probably one of my favorite fantasy fights at heavyweight, I might have to make a video on it sometime. I think about this one every time I try ranking the champs from the 90s, these two always fall right next to each other on the list. I know it might seem crazy, but this feels like the sort of matchup that'd make for an all-time classic- Or at least, it does to me. Two excellent jabbers with power in both hands and somewhat shaky chins, combine that with the fact that both of these guys were equally intelligent and ferocious in their respective peaks, and I just can't see this NOT turning out amazing. It's another one of those fantasy matches where I really don't give a **** about who wins, I just wish that I was able to make it happen. Douglas is probably the safer pick, but that doesn't matter to me.
We didn’t see how, even that version of Douglas, handled a southpaw technical boxer, so the styles could’ve been wrong for him, or maybe not. It’s hard to say, but I might still slightly favour Douglas.
Remember that even the version of Buster Douglas that beat Tyson was compromised. Imagine his absolute peak without all the BS he had to endure in the lead up to the Tyson fight.
