Corrie Sanders vs Michael Moorer

Sanders. Too big, fast and hard hitting.

Moorer had skills no doubt but his chin won't take Sanders' big bombs.

 

Cue DinoHerol with "failed retired fatty that never got a title shot" in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

 

true, Moorer beats both retired sanders who killed prime wlad in seconds and the prime one whom rahamn destoryed. But not so convincingly, it'd narrow points after some tetchy moments early on in that version.Whereas he would KO old retired sanders who easily killed wlad in seconds, around midfight.

 

Would be a up and down fight for both guys from the opening round. Both could hit and both could be dropped. But some how can see moorer been last man standing.. Just

 

Sanders ko's Moorer...nearly as quickly and emphatically as Tua did him. Sanders was too big, too fast handed and powerful not to capitalize on Moorer's weak chin. He'd hurt and stop Michael within the first round...easy.

 

Agreed. Wholeheartedly.

As a heavy, Moorer was not a fast starter. He needs to be against this guy. He will not weather storms to come back like he did against Jirov.

The other habit of MM I do not like whatsoever against this opponent is letting his hands go. What he does is wait until the guy is in his punching circumference and then lets those hands go. When he does, he's the most accurate handed heavy I've ever seen. But fighters can be outside that zone and all he does is stand and wait. I sure think Corrie keeps him in that lets call it "neutral zone". And MM will not last against this guys punches when he's spending rounds there. Also like the underrated right hook of Sanders to get through that defense.

 

It probably comes down to who's body of work you appreciate more. For me there it's Moorer, quite clearly, but I do accept Sanders has the speed to land that one shot that changes the course of the fight. This comment may be a bit out of context, but I do struggle to favour the guy that will be going in there looking for one shot from the get go. With Sanders we can at least we assume he will try to set that shot up, but I'd still back a pre-Foreman Moorer to get the job done with 1 or 2 shaky moments on the way.

 

There's some real good points being posted. I'm expecting the majority to pick Sanders and it's hard to argue against it, even if I don't see it going down that way.

 

I'm leaning towards Sanders but I think its anybody's fight really.

 

You know, I'm starting to think there isn't a huge class of difference between these two men's heavyweight careers. Moorer has slightly more depth and one less embarrassing loss. But it's not a terribly huge gulf at all, they are near the level.

Moorer:

Wins:
Holyfield
Stewert
Cooper
Jirov
Schulz
Billups
Botha
Bean
Bonecrusher

Losses:
Holyfield
Foreman
Tua


Sanders:

Wins:
W. Klitschko
Cooper
Czyz
Billups
Cole
De Leon
Sprott
Puritty
DuPlooy

Losses:
V. Klitschko
Rahman
Tubbs

 

Agree on the Gulf thing. Moorer also had defeats to Tua and Casillo or whatever that guys name was, though both were well past prime.

 

Lol@ at just listing names for the hell of it as if you believe people don't know that those names are all totally useless.

Moore's worst are better than Sanders best outside WK.

Cole? Czyz? lmao

 

Beating Wladimir Klitschko was a better win than any Moorer had.. The Holyfield who MM beat was in bad condition. He had a bum shoulder and a heart issue. They rematched when Evander was better prepared and got utterly destroyed. Had Holy been in proper form the first time around then Frans Botha ( who Sanders beat 5 times in the amateurs ) would probably be his best win.

 

yeah, I didn't count Sanders' last loss either but in truth, Tua could probably count for Mooer, I might add him.

And regarding their signature performances. I think Sanders being the only man to blow out Wlad like this is more impressive than Moorer's workman controversial win over a Holyfield we all can agree had something going on that night at the very least. And the way Sanders held his own against Vitali and Rahman in defaet