Ironically, Big George didn't deserve the shot he got from Moorer

Foreman's 2nd title run gets criticized on here a lot.

 

Nor did Vitali deserve a fight with Peter, looking at it as a meritocracy through current affairs in a division. But in the fight game, you can earn a shot by what you have achieved overall or generating public interest by hook, crook or anything else without earning it through athletic performance.

He earned it with a phenomenal career and incredibly shrewd media savvy. Not the way everyone should be required to, granted, but it's not unique to earn a shot in the business of titles instead of the performance of sport. That's my framing, not a disagreement. We agree it wasn't earned in the sense you used it and it's partly to the blame/credit for a historical achievement.

 

Who was this top ten contender he’d supposedly beaten?

 

Not true. Vitali was Emeritus Champion and entitled to an immediate title shot when he returned.

 

Yeah, Rodrigues had just been destroyed.

I’m not critical of guys who beat whom the governing body requires them to in order to get a title shot, but I think George got three off name recognition without winning anything remotely close to an eliminator. I imagine someone like McCall could’ve won a title in his forties if awarded three title shots with two of them being chinny guys.

 

It probably was the biggest money fight Moorer could get, and against a 45 year old why not?

 

For what it's worth, Rodrigues was clinging to the WBA #10 spot when he fought Foreman, so he does just about count.

 

Neither of you are disagreeing with what I've said when I have clarified what would be meant by the term 'deserve' and how I frame it as either deserving in the normative sense of what should be through pure up-to-date sport performance or more what might be cunning interest-hustling and other means and circumstances where you could earn a shot in a business opportunity sense.

Neither fighter deserved a shot based on what should be required you are doing at the time you get the shot-by fighting. Vitali quite clearly could not have, as he wasn't even fighting. The basis of the thread is based on that type of deserving, unless I misunderstood the intention. But both deserved the shot by other circumstance in the business as by laurel carryover, of status previously earned and crafting public interest partly around it without having to prove his relevance at the time. I was well aware of the emeritus status, I can assure you.

 

The last guy before Vitali to retire as heavyweight champion was Ali, and he did return for an immediate title shot. Vitali continued the trend.

Foreman got three title shots without beating a top ten contender.