why is this never mentioned? beat holy for wba/ibf, lost it to foreman won the vacant wbo won the vacant ibf and lost it to holy
Michael Moorer was one of those champs that was a natural 175er, he could have dominated that division from 89-96 if he could have kept his weight down.
i thought he only had the wbo at 175 and the title when he beat holy, i had no idea he was a 3x titlist at heavy or that he regained a title after losing to foreman
I think that saying the WBO is legitimate now (or that ANY of the alphabet soup "titles" are legitimate) is to do it a great overservice. Moorer is a one time lineal champion. All else is irrelevant, except as a means of getting 12 round fights.
Cause some naysayers wanna prove that Double M was not one of the most explosive, gifted LHWTs and HWTs of the 90s and it was all about Lennox Lewis and to whom he lost and won...
Moorer vs Cooper was for the WBO belt. But it was downplayed so much, even to the point where I think HBO refused to mention the WBO belt by name as a title "they didn't recognise", heh!
Its like how they announce Wlad as "THE 2 time world champion" when he is not. He may have held a WBO belt but that doesnt merit his introduction as "THE" 2 time world heavyweight champion that they do at all his fights. He is THE one time champion.
