Oscar Bonavena vs Michael Moorer

[quote=klompton;10260419]Moorer is not better than peralta. Moorer has ONE elite win in his entire career and that was a razor thin decision over a listless holy who a lot of people (myself included) thought he lost. How does that place him in the level of giving a beating to a guy who competed at the elite level of the greatest he era ever and gave everyone hell? How many of bonavenas fights have you actually seen to be able to judge him? I've seen the majority of his fights and most of moorers. Sorry but anyone who struggles with swindell and those guys and gets stopped by a fatass old foreman is not better than a guy who took a prime foreman the distance and who defeated willie pastrano and mauro mina among others.[/quote]

Bingo...that razor thin decision was as listless as his opponent was BTW...and that's all Moorer's heavyweight claim to fame is based on. Bonavena went 25 rounds with Joe Frazier and never came close to being decked or even staggered....so what's this serious punishment that he's supposed to succumb to? Bonavena's sheer awlwardness bothered Ali all night long till the 15th. If Moorer had any serious firepower at all he would have stopped Foreman, for all the many punches he was able to hit him with..and in no way can MM be compared to a '66 or a '68 Joe Frazier, who laid it on Oscar all night in their 15 round rematch..and Ringo navigated both the punishment as well as the 15 round distance pretty damned well. Moorer was neither the perpetual motion pressure punching machine that was Frazier, nor did he have the heavyweight pop that either Jimmy Ellis or even Muhammad Ali had. If anyone is likening Moorer's stoppage of a fat overachiever like Botha as a parallel to what he would do to Bonavena, that's a mistake also. Bonavena was a stronger, rougher and harder hitting fighter than Botha...and he could take punishment far better. Moorer would find himself on the deck when one of Oscar's wild punches would find their mark on his fragile as glass chin....and by the way, Jorodz, I respectfully disagree, at least on my part, that an honest assessment of Moorer's relative worth, i.e., his weaknesses as a heavyweight equates as "hatred" for the guy. I was pulling for him to beat Holyfield the first time and close as it was, I think he deserved the decision...but that 1st Holyfied fight was his high water mark as a heavyweight..and though he was a fine lightheavy, MM dosen't deserve this grand, exalted esteem you guys give him as a heavy.

 

Bingo...that razor thin decision was as listless as his opponent was BTW...and that's all Moorer's heavyweight claim to fame is based on. Bonavena went 25 rounds with Joe Frazier and never came close to being decked or even staggered....so what's this serious punishment that he's supposed to succumb to? Bonavena's sheer awlwardness bothered Ali all night long till the 15th. If Moorer had any serious firepower at all he would have stopped Foreman, for all the many punches he was able to hit him with..and in no way can MM be compared to a '66 or a '68 Joe Frazier, who laid it on Oscar all night in their 15 round rematch..and Ringo navigated both the punishment as well as the 15 round distance pretty damned well. Moorer was neither the perpetual motion pressure punching machine that was Frazier, nor did he have the heavyweight pop that either Jimmy Ellis or even Muhammad Ali had. If anyone is likening Moorer's stoppage of a fat overachiever like Botha as a parallel to what he would do to Bonavena, that's a mistake also. Bonavena was a stronger, rougher and harder hitting fighter than Botha...and he could take punishment far better. Moorer would find himself on the deck when one of Oscar's wild punches would find their mark on his fragile as glass chin....and by the way, Jorodz, I respectfully disagree, at least on my part, that an honest assessment of Moorer's relative worth, i.e., his weaknesses as a heavyweight equates as "hatred" for the guy. I was pulling for him to beat Holyfield the first time and close as it was, I think he deserved the decision...but that 1st Holyfied fight was his high water mark as a heavyweight..and though he was a fine lightheavy, MM dosen't deserve this grand, exalted esteem you guys give him as a heavy.[/quote]

:thinktrue a lot of this thread isn't hatred per se and that's a strong word, but it doesn't seem like moorer gets any respect lately (except oddly enough at 175, where he did NOTHING).

i agree that moorer deserved a close but clear decision in the first fight. but as someone pointed out earlier, holyfield (past his best), easily rectified the situation in the rematch.

i guess it's hard for me to wrap my head around a top, but awkward and mauling, contender in the 70s being such a heavy favourite over a legitimate heavyweight champion. two things i need to consider:

1)being a top contender in the 70s may be more valuable than struggling with the elite in a lesser era, with only one truly memorable win. moorer's struggles against cooper and his loss to foreman do him no favours

2)styles (as always) make fights. i'll need to familiarize myself better with bonevena to make an informed decision about how they'd mesh.

 

Bonavena came up short against quick technical boxers like Ellis, Patterson and Ali. Moorer was a defensively solid, short sharp punches and big power when he sits on his shots. He has plenty of reach and height advantage here too

That statement is ridiculous, Moorer absolutely was a hell of a puncher who could take men out with 1 shot at least on par with Ali/Ellis, who aren't notable punchers themselves

You don't hate Moorer, but more often than not you'll pick 60s/70s fighters over most in history, that's your favorite era but it clouds your judgement

Yes he is better and more proven than Peralta. Yes he has only 1 win over an ATG and that's 1 more win than Bonvena/Peralta has. Just because you don't think Holyfield looked at his best doesn't make it so, that version of Holyfield looked very good in his prior and subsequent fights. You've also glossed over much of the good work Moorer did aside from the Holyfield fight. If Bonavena can't beat Patterson/Ellis what makes anyone think he can beat Moorer?

Frazier only had 11 fights coming into the Bonavena fight and he was knocked down, Moorer may have stopped this inexperienced version of Frazier if he puts him down

 

The fact that Moorer is an overrated, chinny, unmotivated, and mentally weak fighter who struggled with or lost to the best fighters he ever faced who werent close to on par with the level of competition that Bonavena faced and gave ten kinds of hell to.

And anyone who says Peralta never beat an ATG fighter or wasnt as good as Moorer has no clue who Peralta was or what he accomplished in his career. Hell, Mauro Mina, who Peralta beat, was better than Moorer and would have kicked the living **** out of him at 175 where its almost universally recognized that Moorer was a better fighter than when he was at HW.

You better bring more than unconvincing gift win (rendered by two of three judges who are probably the worst in LV history) over a faded, listless, roided up, Holyfield in which even your trainer is screaming at you to do more against an opponent who is clearly there for the taking, if you want to be compared with the 70s HWs. One win like that, and yes thats all he has, is not going to win you any laurals in the 1970s.

 

So basically Oscar wins in your opinion because of the era he fought in. Fair enough at least you said so . Bonavena is a guy who made a career out of losing although he sometimes looked good doing so.
Moorers win over Holyfield is so under rated it's kind of sad, he won the fight, not the nutjob Teddy Atlas. He acquitted himself well in the rematch as well considering how fat he was, almost dropping Holy.

 

PowerPuncher..you're confusing the lightheavy Moorer with the heavyweight version...his power dosen't\didn't translate to heavyweight....and his chin was made of the finest crystal as well...a horrible combination for a heavyweight.
As for my preference regarding 60's and 70's fighters..lol..man it's because they

This content is protected

better...with few exceptions. Just to be fair however, I am a HUGE admirer of Manny Pacqiauo...I rate him as one of the greatest fighters of all time..and predict near or equal greatness for his countryman Nonito Donaire.

 

Yes I absolutely think that the 1970s was a better, more competetive era than the 1990s and that the competition that Bonavena shined against was a better class of competition than Moorer beat, as such, yes because Bonavena was a top guy in the 1970s I think he was better than Moorer. Period.

So lets get this straight: Moorer, who struggled with basically every fighter he was faced he was decent slaughters Bonavena who was never slaughtered by anyone. Yet you also think he did well in the rematch with Holy... Interesting.

 

Oscar is a bit of a wild card cause he could punch and was awkward as hell, but I'll still pick the finer fighter, and that was Moorer.

Moorer, UD. He was a really fine fighter, just not really cut out for heavyweight warfare. If he could keep it a boxing match, and work behind his jab with a clear mind, there are very few guys he loses too.

 

...How dare you try and judge Oscar's H2H value by only watching his biggest fights that he only just happened to lose in. Let's remember...he gave HELL in those fights! Apologize, pleb. Why not attain film of his unboxrec'd 1966 masterclass against 10-23-7 Bubae Oscuro "Bubba McJackwagon" Macagaña in Dúmpéwátér, Argentina? Granted, Bubba is an unknown today, to plebs, but he fought from 1964-1980, and in his prime, most likely crushes any of today's guys, and most of the nineties "pugilists". Bubba even won a round against MAP(Miguel Angel Paez)! For the Mar del Plata super cruiserweight title! :happy:happy:happy

 

Boxed Ears has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space.
:nono

 

:good:good

:rofl:rofl..There's no one who's posts I enjoy more than Boxed Ears..:good

 

LoL at Peralta being better than Moorer.

 

Yes. He was. Watch peralta against the higher level of competition than moorer fought and tell me he wasn't.

 

I think Oscar would KO Moorer. Moorer obviously has better technique, but Oscar is simply a tougher man who does have skills and a punch.

I think boils down to Moorer not being durable enough.