do you class these two in the same category as roy jones, michael spinks, bob fitz in being light and heavy weight i know charles never officially won the title But COME ON he was the number one / champ by a mile. Moorer only won the a lightly regarded version of the 175 and never put a case forward for him being the best at light. He deffo beat the man at heavy. RJJ title at heavy cant be too well regarded. ruiz was only champ cos of politics. lewis should have the wba belt
Charles may have been the best LHW ever. At HW he was World Champ. After he beat Joe Louis no other boxer could claim he was HW Champ. Moorer was a good LHW but never beat the best in that division. At HW he was the Lineal Champ after beating Holyfield... but Lewis and later McCall had the WBC belt during this time. Charles beat Louis, Walcott 2 out of 4, and gave Marciano hell two times in losing efforts... in Charles' 98th and 99th pro fights. He beat 3 of the best fighters who never won world titles in Charley Burley, Jimmy Bivins, and Lloyd Marshall... all 3 are Hall of Famers. He beat LHW World Champs Archie Moore x3, Joey Maxim x5, Gus Lesnevich, and Anton Christoforidis. He beat MW World Champ Teddy Yarosv. He drew with MW World Champ Ken Overlin very early in his career. He lost a SD to LHW World Champ Harold Johnson in his 95th pro fight. Now H2H at LHW and HW? At LHW I'll take Charles by decision. At HW I'll take Charles by decision. At LHW Charles would be the much more experienced fighter, the faster fighter with the better footwork, he'd have the better defense, and be the more accurate fighter. At HW the difference in speed would be even greater... although Moorer gained more experience by this time. Moorer could hurt Charles and I'm sure he would. Moorer was a right handed fighter who fought southpaw... his right jab was his bread and butter. Charles was elusive enough not to get caught with too many combos.
I can't believe this is a serious thread topic. At lightheavy or heavy, Charles just plain outclasses Michael Moorer. Knocks him out as a matter of fact.
GI, I have him @ #1. May I ask who is your #1 and why? I am genuinely surprised that you don't have Charles at 1.
I consider Moorer a WBO LHW Champ in a time when the WBO didn't mean too much. He was also WBO HW Champ but later became the Lineal HW Champ when he picked up the WBA/IBF belts by beating Holyfield, WMD12. He regained the vacant IBF HW belt by beating Schulz by close decision. Charles was the best LHW of his era but never received a well deserved shot at the title. He was the Lineal HW Champ and almost two times but lost a very close decision to Walcott in their 4th fight.
There has only ever been one Light Heavyweight World Champion who has then won the Heavyweight championship, and that was the jinx. Fitzsimmons did it the other way around. To think anything else, is too cheapen the value of the championships...
I consider Tunney, Fitz, Charles, Spinks and Langford to have all been number 1 in both weight classes. Technically speaking Burns beat the lhw champ whilst weighing under the limit also.
