Sultan Ibragimov V Michael Moorer ?

And he nearly stopped Felix Savon in the gold medal match in the 2000 Olympic games, cutting him and visibly hurting Savon. Savon won on points.

 

Moorer by decision, iggy was easy meat titlist who nevver did anything besides that.

whereas as an amateur he was much better.

 

Moorer ud

 

I'll go with MM and those accurate hands to get the decision win. Tough fight and this is figuring on Moorer coming in light---not the heavier version that forgot to use his legs.

 

He absolutely wasn't.

 

Bump, good fight.

 

Kind of what has come out since this thread was created is that Iggy had a chronically broken left hand, which makes a lot of sense. If explains why he went from being an explosive puncher that impressed Tyson himself during the Whitaker fight to a cautious boxer later on-- and why he retired early.

Michael Moorer became highly overrated when he beat Holyfield- who was experience a heart attack and organ failure at the time. And he still arguably should have lost. This is the guy who lost to 45 year old Foreman and Castillo, was humiliated by Tua, and went life and death with Bert Cooper.

Also, Sultan was a real southpaw whereas Moorer's stance was a gimmick to shore up his limited skill set.

I honestly think that there was a hypothetical versio of Sultan that absolutely smokes Moorer, but Moorer accomplished a great deal more and will probably always gets the benefit of that doubt.

 

I’m leaning towards Moorer. Ibragimov was on a similar level to guys like Frans Botha and Axel Schulz

 

He was better than them.

 

Ibragimov outboxes him to a boring decision IMO. Longer punches, more mobile, better defence and more strings to his bow skill wise.