Which was more impressive. Holmes win over Ray Mercer or Foreman's win over Michael Moorer

Might depend on your definition of dominate. Mercer was lured in by Holmes time and again and made to fight his fight. There were a couple of times Larry got into trouble, but more often than not he brilliantly ducked, parried, slipped...an incredible performance that had Ray playing into his hands.

Perhaps more precisely, Holmes dominated the overall character of the fight. Mercer was eating out of the palm of his hand at some point in practically every round. And Ray ate a whole BUNCH of nice punches, including some uppercuts that were stronger than average from Larry, quite accurate in fact.

He didn't dominate it as much as the Berbick fight, if you want to look at it that way.

 

Foreman for me but both are excellent performances.

 

Picking Holmes was really a function of how he won (considering his age) rather than what was at stake. The Foreman win was far more dramatic and single-handedly put George in the Top 10. George's win is one for the ages but Larry's win was pretty damn good.

Incidentally it was Larry who (scoring wise) performed better against Holyfield than Foreman.

 

I watched both those fights live as they happened. The Holmes win over Mercer was far more impressive (and shocking). Everyone expected Larry to get knocked out, or, at least beat up in a one sided loss.
Foreman's win was more dramatic. But, he was losing that fight badly (regardless of whether it was part of his "strategy") up until the fateful, one-punch KO. Moorer was too fragile. He was ripe for the picking. I won good money on that fight.

 

I had Larry firmly ahead after 7.