Mike Weaver vs Max Baer

Well this one isn't going the distance. I haven't seen enough of Baer to make a better call ...

 

Mike Weaver by decision or late round KO.

Weaver was very good from 1975-1984. He went 21-4-1 (17) during this time and 3-2-1 (2) in HW world title fights. He would lose one more world title fight, KO8 vs. Pinklon Thomas in 1985 (the fight was pretty much even at the the of the stoppage).

Let's look at those 26 fights from '75-'84. He beat Pedro Lovell W10, Bernardo Mercado KO5, Stan Ward KO9 x2 (avenging an earlier close decision loss), Scott Ledoux W10, John Tate KO15 (1980, won the WBA title), Gerrie Coetzee KO13, James Tillis W15, and others.

He lost a close decision to Leroy Jones in 1978. He gave Larry Holmes problems before being stopped in the 12th round in 1979. He lost the WBA title to Michael Dokes LKOby1 in 1982 but the strange ending set up a rematch. Many people felt Weaver deserved the decision over Dokes but the fight was scored even, D15 in 1983.

He stopped Carl "The Truth" Williams in 1986.

Baer was a little taller and had a little longer reach, their weight was similar. Both men were strong and pinched hard. Baer was only stopped 3x in 79 pro fights... Joe Louis and Lou Nova x2. He was outboxed by Schaaf (first fight) Loughran, Uzcudun, and others but he beat Schmeling KO10 and Carnera KO11 before being outboxed by Braddock.

 

I consider Weaver to be the better all-around fighter, but he was a slow starter and Max's wild swinging ways may have finished Mike off early.

 

Baer’s edge in class, and in durability, should see him installed as the favourite here.

With the obvious provision that this is Baer that we are talking about.

 

What exactly do you mean by "edge in class"? Just want to make sure I understand the lingo.

 

Baer was a more talented fighter, and a more successful fighter.

Baer was an underachiever, while Weaver was an overachiever.

On paper Baer should win this.

 

It means that Jim Braddock could have taken an undefeated Tate or an undefeated Tillis.

 

I'm a big fan of Mike Weaver. He was a great puncher who gave Holmes all he could handle. He could also box and had a very good jab which he used to great effect in the Pinklon Thomas fight.

I can see him outboxing Baer for large parts of the fight if not caught early. Trouble is Weaver didn't have the best chin so he would be walking the tightrope all night with Baer.

Weaver is capable of winning, especially if Baer has an off night, but I can see Max landing that right and Weaver falling.

 

As you say, Weaver falls well within the category of “fighters that Baer can lose to”.

 

More talented how?

 

Far more natural talent.

If Weaver approaches the sport the way Baer did, he never sees the top ten.

 

He might if he fought in the 1930s. Still not sure what you mean or what you're basing this on though.

 

Not many people are going to survive the blows of a prime Max Baer.

Max KO 7

 

The Baer that gave Schmeling a beating I think stops " Hercules" Weaver.. And this is coming from a guy who has a real soft spot for the 80s heavyweights as they were the ones I grew up watching.. I think Weaver's chin coupled with Max's power do not bode well for Weaver chances. But make no mistake about it even the best version of Max is going to have a tough fight against Weaver unless he catches him early and takes him out ..