It goes to show that Moorer has always been a bigger puncher at heavyweight than he's got credit for. Let's not forget, Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyosn didn't look like very hard punchers when faced with Holyfield's chin; and there's no shame in having your punches bounce off George Foreman's chin. If he'd come along today, Moorer would have a great potential career at cruiserweight, considering the revised division and the (relatively) greater respect for it.
Can't comment on that one. Never saw it. Wasn't Jirov a cruiser originally, though, and a bit worn after the Toney fight?
Jirov looked worn, but Moorer (who'd lost to Eliseo Castillo of all people in his previous fight) looked fat and slow. Jirov was well ahead on points going into the ninth, but Moorer sent him into dreamland. Jirov was a cruiser at his peak, of course, but remember Moorer started out at a light-heavyweight. He had very underrated power, something I think surprised Holyfield and gave Moorer a big advantage in their first fight.
I think wins over Botha and Schulz are under appreciated, considering both were undefeated when Moorer beat them back to back.
There's no doubt that Michael Moorer was one of the elite heavyweights from '91/'92 until '97/'98. I just always thought he could have been in better shape. Moorer himself reckoned a food addiction effected his career. Make a top 10 of heavyweights of the 1990s and Moorer should definitely figure in it, arguably top 5. Moorer was very good.
I thought Moorer was a good fighter. Botha was a tough SOB. Seems he had trouble fighting inner demons more than fighting men in the ring to me.
He was a good puncher, a skilful boxer, a southpaw, and he got off the deck to win fights, he often came firing back when hurt. He wasn't phenomenal at any one thing, but you add all those ingredients together and he's very good, any elite heavyweight, good enough to be champion.