Who achieved more?: Riddick Bowe or Michael Moorer

Agree completely. That version of Holyfield that Moorer squeaked by was terrible. The next time these two met, Holyfield was what, 34-35?

 

Depends do you rate Joan Guzman as a great 2/3weight champion? Hes undefeated

 

Yeah, he was 35. Moorer was just about 30.
And, truth be told, Holyfield looked old and weary in that rematch too but had enough to beat Moorer up when he needed to, and Holyfield's been past his best ever since that first fight in '94.

I admire Moorer's willingness to get up off the deck and fight in many of his fights, and recognize he was a decent boxer and puncher, but his accomplishments at heavyweight have been overstated here by some on this thread.

 

I see where your coming from with this, and Im a big Riddick Bowe fan, but from an achievement perspective:
Moorer
LH all knockouts from turing pro (thats still pretty impressive since it was 22 fights) althoug not murderers row
three time champion one secondary title
coming up from a lower weight division
somewhat small heavyweight
Forgot to add first southpaw heavyweight champ (its an achievement. )

Bowe
two time heavyweight champ one secondary title

From a fighters perspective I agree his competition wasnt stellar, and Bowe was the better all around fighter, beat a better version of Holyfield for sure. Not sure I would rank Ferguson or Dokes much higher than Botha or Bean as stellar title defenses.
Moorer's resume as a heavyweight contender wasnt too bad either, I would say somewhat equal to Bowe's coming up the ladder.

 

I think he is a very good fighter. Theres a reason he cant land a big marquee fight. Very good slick fighter. Hes also pretty young, his career isnt over yet to call him great, but hes on his way.

 

Can't really make up my mind on this one. Whether you think much of Moorer's light heavyweight career or not, anytime someone moves up to heavyweight and wins a belt it's quite an achievement, especially when it's a nearly undisputed title.

On the other hand Bowe was undisputed champ, beat a much better version of Holyfield, and undoubtedly was better at heavyweight, despite the fact that he did **** all while having the title and spent the last few years of his career on an increasingly weird and sad slide. (I don't count anything after the second Golata bout as being part of Bowe's career, in case you were wondering).

It's a real tragedy in my mind that this is such a legitimate question, because there's no doubt in the world that Bowe had much bigger potential and ability.

 

Add the WBO tittle to Bowe's resume.
Bowe is my pick.

 

Both had the unique distinction of beating the same man for their "titles"..and both had the good sense, intentional or not, of avoiding Lennox Lewis, the stanout heavyweight of his era, who of course would have dominated (ko'ed) either one, and yes that includes Bowe.