Is Michael Moorer an overrated LHW ?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MarkusFlorez99, Jul 19, 2021 at 5:13 PM.

  1. HolDat

    HolDat Active Member Full Member

    1,080
    1,265
    Sep 25, 2020
    Exactly!
     
  2. HolDat

    HolDat Active Member Full Member

    1,080
    1,265
    Sep 25, 2020
    You're overrating Moorer.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  3. Colonel Sanders

    Colonel Sanders Classic discussion : small vs big, old vs modern Full Member

    6,789
    3,020
    Sep 13, 2012
    I think he loses to Spinks and Qawi... has a better chance VS Saad, but I still wouldn't favor him... and I pick him to stop Yaqui, which most did in the recent McGrain thread. I just think none of them has an easy night of work against Moorer.
     
  4. White Bomber

    White Bomber Active Member Full Member

    866
    472
    Mar 31, 2021
    Wrong. You may have only 6 spots available, I still have 8. Only Moore and Charles are on my list, the other 2 aren't.
     
  5. White Bomber

    White Bomber Active Member Full Member

    866
    472
    Mar 31, 2021
    Yes. I've said this many times, being great is one thing, winning a H2H battle is another.

    Simple, cause I see B-Hop and Tarver as being far better than the others you mentioned.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2021 at 12:46 PM
  6. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,810
    5,968
    May 30, 2019
    You know that your opinion without any substance isn't a strong evidence of someone being good H2H right?
     
  7. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    22,854
    33,561
    Mar 3, 2019
    Yes, and normally I'd agree with you, but when you're favouring somebody whose best win at the poundage is between Leslie Stewart or Frankie Swindell, vs a large portion of my own top thirty heavyweights, you end up looking daft.

    Especially when the argument is rife with inconsistencies. Picking him over Hopkins but not Johnson or Maxim is mental, and so is giving John Henry Lewis - somebody who was rated as the best light-heavy they ever saw by Eddie Futch (or Ray Arcel, I can't remember) - no chance at all. It's preposterous, really.
    Why?

    You've been asked questions like this countless times now, and have never answered with something substantial.

    Why are Hopkins - whose record at LHW pales in comparison to Lewis or Rosenbloom - and Tarver better fighters than Harold Johnson and Billy Conn. BTW, them being too ancient doesn't cut it. Conn was good enough to be like 9-3 up vs Joe Louis and Johnson beat the two best light-heavyweights in history.

    What are the technical/physical reasons that those two are not as good as Tarver and Hopkins?
     
    70sFan865 likes this.
  8. White Bomber

    White Bomber Active Member Full Member

    866
    472
    Mar 31, 2021
    The eye test says it all for me.
     
  9. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    22,854
    33,561
    Mar 3, 2019
    Oh my god, it's like getting blood from a stone.

    I repeat:

    What are the technical/physical reasons that those two are not as good as Tarver and Hopkins?
     
    70sFan865 likes this.
  10. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,810
    5,968
    May 30, 2019
    Are you aware that this is not argument? Without any elaboration, I can say that "eye test says it all about Fitzsimmons vs Tyson matchup, Bob by KO".
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  11. Eddie Ezzard

    Eddie Ezzard Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,246
    2,590
    Jan 19, 2016
    You like this phrase don't you? It's your 'Get out of jail free card' when you can't form an argument based on analysis or evidence.

    You're in danger of becoming the forum's Luis Santana, ducking out of the fight and going for a shallow meaningless victory instead of standing your ground and winning or losing on your shield.
     
  12. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    14,818
    7,378
    Apr 3, 2012
    I just watched Moorer's fight with Leslie Stewart. He showed good power and a strong jab, but was reluctant to let his hands go and wasn't especially hard to hit. Stewart had a decent amount of success.

    Moorer, at that point, looked like the kind of guy who veteran fighters like Ward and Hopkins would be able to take advantage of. Spinks and Moore would've probably blasted him out.
     
  13. ecto55

    ecto55 דמוקרטיזציה של השממות האיסלאמיות כעת Full Member

    917
    107
    May 28, 2009
    Absolutely.

    I like Moorer, I like his viciousness, but its not that 'special' or unique a quality. Moorer's problem, I think, is that was unimaginative and stupid in the ring...anyone who gets knocked out by George Foreman the way he did but thinks to himself / says to Atlas in the change room's afterwards 'yeah, but I was boxing the shi t out of him wasn't I'....isn't taking the right lessons away from that event. I've heard he's bright outside the ring....it doesn't always translate across unfortunately. He's not what could be described as a great boxing mind....and while you can get away that these days because boxing is largely reduced the application of one basic fight plan vs another, that wasn't the case in yore days.

    Put Moorer back in the 40's and 50's where guys would box / fight various modes, make adjustments themselves let alone follow corner advice, set traps over short or long cooks (that even Archie would fall into) etc etc...Moorer's just going to struggle at the point that he can't rely on his physical tools. We've all already seen him (and Atlas apparently) be outsmarted by a glacial Foreman when it couldn't have mattered more; what do you think is going to happen when he's put in there over 15 with the trap setting mega-minds.

    I rate him as an interesting LHW on h2h's, but I'm really not sure he'd have even got past Toney's best at LHW. That said, White Bomber is entitled to his beliefs, as are we all.