Prime Floyd Patterson vs Prime Michael Moorer

I'll go with Patterson, he is faster, better skilled and more proven. Moorer doesnt hit hard enough and is himself a smallish heavy so Pattersons durability wont be a problem. Patterson by UD or late stoppage.

 

Picking Patterson is fine.. But Moorer was 6'2", and weighed between 215-220 lbs during his best heavyweight years. That's a pretty good size advantage over a man who was 6'0", 188 in his prime. And he did stop roughly 18 of his 30 heavyweight victims, with mostly the more durable types lasting the distance with him,ie. Holyfield, Martin, Smith, etc.. I'm also not sure weather or not Moorer's being a south paw would have any bearing on Patterson, but its something to consider.

 

Patterson by mid round KO. Patterson too fast. Both have suspect chins, but, Patterson more likely to outbox Moorer and land the big bombs first. If Moorer starts aggressively (Something he rarely did as a heavyweight) he gets knocked out even sooner.

 

Yeah, Moorer clearly has a size advantage, but alot of it comes from weight training. Thats still an advantage, Moorer was clearly a bigger and stronger man regardless if it was natural or extra bulk, but it is not as if Moorer was a huge man naturally outweighing him by 30 pounds. I believe that alot of the later day heavyweights would have been to big for Patterson, but in Moorer I see a guy roughly the same size as the fighters that Patterson used to fight, only a little stronger and heavier from weight training.

Im not that impressed with Moorer to be honest, but then I never gave him that much credit for his win against Holyfield and I thought that an elite fighter had no business loosing to the old Foreman. Maybe Im unfair though, it all depends on how you rate his win against Holyfield i guess. I buy Evanders excuse, if you don't then Moorer's stock will rise quite a bit. But for me Patterson was the more proven fighter, and Moorer wasnt big enough (although bigger) to bridge gap in class.

 

If Moorer were fighting in Patterson's era, he'd likely be a small heavyweight around 195-200 lbs, but I don't see him staying at light heavyweight his whole career as I don't think he could have kept his weight down much past the age of 23 or 24. It was actually part of the reason why he moved up to begin with. So yes his size advantage would be shortened. But he'd still be the larger of the two men, and his punching power would be more damaging to a 188 lbs fighter who's chin was always questionable anyway as opposed to a full sized modern heavyweight with a durable one. Moorer's 1994 win over Evander Holyfield was tainted by the fact that Evander had health issues. He was fighting with an injured shoulder and a possible heart problem. The rematch verified this as a "healthy" Holyfield destroyed him. But beating even that poor version of Holy was probably comparable to Patterson winning the title from a 40 year old Archie Moore. And while losing to a 44 year old Foreman was damaging to his legacy, it doesn't really reflect how Patterson would have faired against Moorer as it would have been a totally different kind of fight. In fact, I might be apt to favoring an old George to do the same or similar thing to a prime Floyd. Let's face it.. Patterson was KO'd by the limited Johannson and decked twice by him in their rubber match. He lasted a combined four minutes in both of his matches with Liston. Moorer is no ATG but he's better than Johannson, Rademacher, Bonavena, Harris, Jackson or an old version of Moore.

 

I agree with most of the things you say, but I don't think Moorer was superior to Johansson (being swedish i probably rate him higher than most though), I think of him more on the level with a guy like Bonavena or maybe Quarry. A solid contender who won some and lost some. Favouring him is fine by me, but Patterson faced and beat better men in my opinion. And although he was, as you say, a bit chinny, he still managed to beat good punchers like Johansson, Chuvalo and Bonavena. I think he could survive Moorer's power. I wont be my house on it though.

 

A fair response.

 

Intriguing matchup.

I would have to go with Patterson for the first few rounds, based on speed alone, he was an excellent boxer and would be beating Moorer to the punch, but Moorer would have his moments.

I would think Moorer begins to do his own damage in the mid rounds, having good speed and Boxing skills he would start narrowing the gap, and by late mid rounds land enough power shots to hurt Patterson, perhaps even knock him down.

This is a rough call in the latter fight, but I think Moorer has enough skills to keep landing on the slowing Patterson and end the fight with the upper hand.

Patterson would win a very close Decision. Moorer is bigger and stronger, a good boxer with solid power and speed. Patterson is smaller, faster, better defense, better combinations and had some pop.

... I think both fighters survive the bell despite not having the greatest of chins. Patterson having the worst of it. Great matchup.....

 

While Moorer was not a very motivated fighter and at times lacked desire he was still talented and had power,patterson at 185/195 and faster would have his work cut out for him,he has the record for bering knocked down the most with a whopping 20 or so and hes never beating a guy of this size,the Liston fights are probably is a blue print here of how it turns out,liston was not extremely fast either,Moorer had decent speed and if he can batter a huge foreman for 9 rounds he will k.o Patterson midway through if not sooner,only guys who hit like Tua demolished him.

Moorer by k.o rnd 4

 

I am going to take Moorer by KO as well.

He did have underrated power, he could hurt bigger men and natural heavyweights. He had a very good counter right, and fair enough defense and movement to trouble Patterson.

Patterson would be comfortably ahead, but I would expect Moorer to land something big eventually, Patterson was knocked down by many fighters in his career. I pick Moorer at his absolute best, to take Patterson.

But Moorer was unmotivated and lazy, and a poor finisher. If he has Altas ripping into him every round, and is at his very most aggressive. He will be able to keep Patterson down.

Otherwise Patterson survives and wins via decision or late KO.

 

Michael Moorer could always punch at both weights and he was fast and I don't care how fast or skilled Patterson was, the casual fans will never understand how much being a southpaw can affect the fight, the orthodox fighter could have all advantages, but if he doesn't know how to box a southpaw, then what good are his advantages really? It turns into a punchers chance, and I never know of Patterson boxing a southpaw, there weren't many southpaws around back then for whatever reason. I say Moorer late stoppage or on points

 

Most south paws were forced to convert to orthodox during earlier era's , they usually would have
excellent jabs, or left hooks.. And I can see Moorer beating Patterson though Patterson was the
better all around fighter. Moorer also had fast hands on top of the south paw advantage, so
that factors in also. If Moorer is motivated he wouldn't have too many issues with the smaller
weak chinned Patterson.

 

Prime Floyd Patterson by stoppage late, TKO 12. This fight would look like Patterson's unanimous 12 round decision win over Eddie Machen, on July 5 1964, in Sweden. He hurt Eddie several times, had him ready to go in the fifth, but backed off, because Machen had mental issues at that time. Floyd would defeat Michael because of his quickness, and combination punching, also Cus D Amato, was with Floyd at this time. Floyd would be countering with sharp right hands to southpaw Moorer.

 

Completely agree, Patterson was the more skilled boxer, but the styles and angles of the punches would throw off Patterson, and when you said southpaws were forced to convert to orthodox, it weren’t just that, most left handed people were forced to try and become right handed, not just in boxing, that’s why there were so few southpaws, it was about 2 percent of boxers were southpaws in the 50s 60s