Michael Moorer vs Marvin Johnson at 175

Johnson was no "bobber and weaver". He had the heart of a lion and ko power especially in the left. Was one of my favs back in the 70s.

Moorer was a beast at LT heavy. Brutal puncher.

Very tough call. Johnson has all the intrinsic advantages. Moorer the physical advantages. Can Marvin take his heart? I honestly can't call this one. Pick em.

 

Johnson is being marked down for his failings against a much higher level of competition than Moorer faced, while Moorer gets props for dominating a weaker field. I'd back Johnson to beat anyone Moorer beat at 175. Could Moorer get past Spinks, Saad, Gregory etc unscathed?

I would pick Moorer to win based on his power and Johnson's shaky chin. Can't undersell Johnson in a fight though, a true warrior.

 

I'm rather surprised that so many people hold Moorer in such high regard as a Light Heavyweight. He was untested at 175lbs. The footage I have watched isn't overwhelmingly impressive either. This isn't to say that he didn't possess enough talent and one shot power to defeat Johnson, who was extremely tough albeit limited in terms of talent, but I would be reluctant to call him a "beast".

 

2 southpaw bangers with shaky chins...not a fight to put money on methinks.

At LHW we have to take Moorer somewhat on trust, his quality of opposition was not the same level as Johnson's - I think the opposition who exposed Johnson's flaws would probably do the same to Moorer.

Johnson strengths and weaknesses were well established by the quality of opposition he faced - the same cannot be said of Moorer.

This fight might come down to who had the biggest heart; I think Johnson showed greater heart than Moorer on a more regular basis - I don't think he would go into a "sulk" as Moorer was somewhat prone to do.

Very tentatively, I pick Johnson.

 

Michael Moorer's reputation as a Light Heavyweight is based largely on assumption rather than fact. He was a titlist there and made numerous successful defences, but the level of opposition was modest at best and he struggled against Leslie Stewart. We can only call on the footage and the results we have at that weight to draw any conclusions, and neither the footage or the results project Michael Moorer as being a phenomenal Light Heavyweight. Favouring him over Marvin Johnson is one thing but there's no basis to start suggesting he could have handled any of the all-timers at 175lbs. Some people's descriptions of him in this thread have been more than hyperbolic.

 

I've just finished watching Michael Moorer's WBO Light Heavyweight title winning effort against Ramzi Hassan from '88. I must consider that Michael was only 21 years old at the time and this only his 12th professional fight, but I have to reiterate points I have already made in regards to the man's abilities.

Moorer was arguably losing up until the stoppage in round 5 when he was able to catch Hassan with a nasty looking hook. And indeed, Moorer was formidable with his finish, showing a great capacity to end proceedings once he had his man hurt, and yet prior to this Moorer was constantly being outworked, out-landed and scarcely initiated any of the exchanges. He was being out-boxed by a non-descript with not a single name on his win column. I don't believe Moorer threw a single combination or followed up one jab during the entire contest.

I stand by what I have already said -- Michael Moorer was a powerful puncher with athletic ability, but he was not a multi-faceted boxer and was susceptible to being out-boxed and out-worked. Shooting a fast jab and throwing single shots might defeat the Hassans of the world, but you would need more strings to your bow at truly elite level.

 

I agree

I think because he had an exciting style and some explosive kos and left the division before he was really tested (except for a faded Stewart), his standing has been elevated.

I liked his style as a Light Heavyweight and remember being disappointed he moved up all the way to Heavyweight, where he no longer had strength and size advantages. He became a less exciting fighter at Heavyweight, except for the war with Bert Cooper, who was a natural Crusierweight himself.

A fight between Moorer and Prince Charles Williams would probably have been an absolute war. It's too bad Moorer didn't go after Williams' IBF title. The WBO title that Moorer had was kind of spurious. I think it was actually invented at the LHW level when he won it. Emanuel Steward was famous for getting WBO titles for his fighters. Gerald McCllelan was another example. Nobody really felt McCllelan had a legitimate world title until he beat Julian Jackson for the WBC title.

 

Moorer was hailed as one of boxing biggest puncher while a light hwt.

 

The kid could definitely punch. I don't believe anyone would deny Moorer that. But it seems to me that he would rely on single shots rather than trying to set up the right hook, or the left hand. He was not a composite puncher that could keep his opponents guessing - not like a Joe Louis.

 

so what

 

I pick Marvin to beat Moorer. Johnson had a much more established career at LH. Marvin fought the very top guys at LH, losing to only the very best, while putting up a hell of a fight while losing. Marvin beat a lot of good fighters. Moorer never really beat anyone at LH.

What I remember most is Marvin Johnson and Matthew Franklin almost killing each other in 2 fights. Franklin always just had a little more in the tank than Marvin.

 

Marvin would win in a ninth round thriller.