just wondering how do you yall think Moorer would have done against Spinks, RJJ, Tarver? Moorer had 22 fights in the LightHW DIV winning all by KO. 10 title defenses all by KO. Could he be the best LightHW of all times? if not Why. I don't think anyone at that weight class could hurt him, but we all know the kind of power moorer has. To bad he was overshadowed by mike tyson. In 1988 moorer fought and won 13 fights by KO including a world title.

Dariusz Michalczewski and Michael Spinks deserve an argument on there behalf.

that was my opening statment, how would Moorer have done against Spinks? or even Michalczewski? do you think anyone in there prime would have beaten moorer in 1988?(in the LHW DIV)

he was great but i dont think he coulda beat roy jones when he 1st enterd the division, that man was simply amazing I dont think Moorer could hit him enough to KO him then, Roy By Decision, maybe like 8 rounds to 4.

he was great but i dont think he coulda beat roy jones when he 1st enterd the division, that man was simply amazing I dont think Moorer could hit him enough to KO him then, Roy By Decision, maybe like 8 rounds to 4.

RJJ was great, i just wonder if he could handle that power, Moorer was very quick at 175 also, not fast as roy, but quick enough to land a few shots. that would have been a great fight

i would go with ROY JJ only because i like him.
Did moorer move between havy and L. Heavy?

RJJ was great, i just wonder if he could handle that power, Moorer was very quick at 175 also, not fast as roy, but quick enough to land a few shots. that would have been a great fight

yeah who knows if he could have handled it , but Roy alos had some power back then, I think this fight woulf be great, but im stickin to my word Roy By Desicion. U should start another thread who could beat Roy at 168. NOw thats a hard question, he was a beast.

http://www.exoticarmsusa.com/Photos/Do%20It%20Big%20-%20Roy%20Jones.jpg

yeah who knows if he could have handled it , but Roy alos had some power back then, I think this fight woulf be great, but im stickin to my word Roy By Desicion. U should start another thread who could beat Roy at 168. NOw thats a hard question, he was a beast.

that wouldn't be hard because no one beats RJJ at 168

Michalczewski would own Roy Jones at light Heavyweight. Roy Jones is a middleweight. Michalczewski would overwhelm the **** out of him.

no one owns RJJ at any weight class in his prime. he was just too good.

he would have pulverized michalewski......it would have been close with RJJ.

either way, he deserves a lot of credit for his achievements...

You are a Jones nuthugger, nobody owns Roy Jones at any weight class my ass. Lennox Lewis owns him at heavyweight. Mike Tyson owns him at heavyweight. Jirov or Toney or Mormeck own him at cruiserweight. Michalczewski would own him at Lt Heavyweight. Jones can own anybody probably at 168 or at middleweight. But he never prooved he could. Jones avoided all the best opposition in every weight class. And Jones was never undisputed champion at any weight class. Not even middleweight. And Jones is a middleweight. At middlweight probably nobody owns him. But 175 and higher he would be owned by the guys I mentioned.
wasent roy jones undisputed champion in light heavyweight? he had all the three big title and some more
WBC Light Heavyweight Title
IBF Light Heavyweight Title
WBA Light Heavyweight Title
IBO Light Heavyweight Title
WBF Light Heavyweight Title
IBA Light Heavyweight Title
NBA Light Heavyweight Title
witch belts do you need to have to be considered undisputed champion?.
and i agree jones dominated much easier at 168
;)

You are a Jones nuthugger, nobody owns Roy Jones at any weight class my ass. Lennox Lewis owns him at heavyweight. Mike Tyson owns him at heavyweight. Jirov or Toney or Mormeck own him at cruiserweight. Michalczewski would own him at Lt Heavyweight. Jones can own anybody probably at 168 or at middleweight. But he never prooved he could. Jones avoided all the best opposition in every weight class. And Jones was never undisputed champion at any weight class. Not even middleweight. And Jones is a middleweight. At middlweight probably nobody owns him. But 175 and higher he would be owned by the guys I mentioned.

i don't think i'm a nuthugger, but you are more of a hater. I just respect his talent. why do you think Toney can own roy at Cruiser but couldn't do it at Middle. And understand when i say owned it doesn't mean he would beat everyone in every weight class. It simply means he can hold his own and put up a competitive fight. and is it possible for anyone on this site to have a conversation without resorting to name calling?

i don't think i'm a nuthugger, but you are more of a hater. I just respect his talent. why do you think Toney can own roy at Cruiser but couldn't do it at Middle. And understand when i say owned it doesn't mean he would beat everyone in every weight class. It simply means he can hold his own and put up a competitive fight. and is it possible for anyone on this site to have a conversation without resorting to name calling?

I think the definition of the word "owned" on this website is not "holding your own" I think it means "dominate, Pulverize, crush." Jones would not own Michalczewski, Mormeck,Tyson, Lewis, Toney at cruiser. That is simply ridiculous.

Jones would not "pulverise" Michalczewski in any fascination of imagination. He would try to dance around but he would get caught. Michalczewski's pressure, jab and handspeed would get him against the ropes and drop him like Johnson and Tarver did but quicker. Jones is a middleweight or 168.

Michalczewski's style is all wrong for Jones. Jones' power cant hurt Michalczewski. Michalczewski can drop Jones with one flush punch. And Michalczewski knows how to cut the ring off and get you to the ropes. That is how you beat Jones. And Michalczewski is big and strong he had a few fights even at cruiserweight.

When Moochi made this statement he was referring to M. Moorer. That is who this thread is decated to. My original question is how would Moorer do against RJJ and other LHW greats

Jones would not "pulverise" Michalczewski in any fascination of imagination. He would try to dance around but he would get caught. Michalczewski's pressure, jab and handspeed would get him against the ropes and drop him like Johnson and Tarver did but quicker. Jones is a middleweight or 168.

Michalczewski's style is all wrong for Jones. Jones' power cant hurt Michalczewski. Michalczewski can drop Jones with one flush punch. And Michalczewski knows how to cut the ring off and get you to the ropes. That is how you beat Jones. And Michalczewski is big and strong he had a few fights even at cruiserweight.
mate, i was saying that michael moorer would have pulverised Michalczewski.

in regards to Jones, I think Jones would have dominated Michalczewski also.....i can't credit Michalczewski all that much as he wouldn't fight outside of Germany...he had it a lot easier there..

I think the definition of the word "owned" on this website is not "holding your own" I think it means "dominate, Pulverize, crush." Jones would not own Michalczewski, Mormeck,Tyson, Lewis, Toney at cruiser. That is simply ridiculous.

i think we have a misunderstanding. This is what i posted (
no one owns RJJ at any weight class in his prime. he was just too good) meaning no one dominates RJJ.he would be able to hold his own in any weight class. I never said he owns the fighters you mentioned.

he would have pulverized michalewski......it would have been close with RJJ.

either way, he deserves a lot of credit for his achievements...

mate, i was saying that michael moorer would have pulverised Michalczewski.

in regards to Jones, I think Jones would have dominated Michalczewski also.....i can't credit Michalczewski all that much as he wouldn't fight outside of Germany...he had it a lot easier there..



Well I highly doubt that, but I am in no position to debate this because I have never seen Moore at Lt Heavy. But Michalczewski's 25 title defences 21 by KO speak for themself.


How would the German judges make a difference in many of Michalczewski's fights when 21 of the 25 defences were by KO?

moorer :eek: are you alright there? :eek:

try ezzard charles, archie moore, spinks, bob foster even Conteh or Saad Mohammed would have taken moorer apart at their peak imo.

Well I highly doubt that, but I am in no position to debate this because I have never seen Moore at Lt Heavy. But Michalczewski's 25 title defences 21 by KO speak for themself.


How would the German judges make a difference in many of Michalczewski's fights when 21 of the 25 defences were by KO?

but all those defence was for the smaller belt WHO, and those he ko was probably bums because of it :cool:

moorer :eek: are you alright there? :eek:

try ezzard charles, archie moore, spinks, bob foster even Conteh or Saad Mohammed would have taken moorer apart at their peak imo.

all great fighters, what do you think they had that Moorer lacked. I don't know if you ever saw Moorer at LHW but he made it look so easy. I have seen tapes on all of these guys except Foster, i only saw his fight with frazier when he got beaten very badly. but i think Moorer would have given them all some good fights.

Kapersky now you are going to make pull out the boxrec file you dickhead.


Derrick Harmon KO 9 (Harmon beat Glen Johnson by UD)

Graciano Rochigiani TKO 10 (former WBC Lt Heavyweight champ holds a win over Michael Nunn among others

Montel Griffin TKO 4 (holds two descison wins over James Toney and DQ win over Roy Jones........ Griffin was ahead on points at time of DQ)

Drake Thadzi TKO 9 (holds a descision win over James Toney)

Virgil HIll UD (former WBA IBF Lt heavyweight champ) lost belts to Michalczewski and then Michalczewski was stripped of WBA and IBF

who where the last 2 guys he just lost to?

Well I highly doubt that, but I am in no position to debate this because I have never seen Moore at Lt Heavy. But Michalczewski's 25 title defences 21 by KO speak for themself.


How would the German judges make a difference in many of Michalczewski's fights when 21 of the 25 defences were by KO?
good point......which one of the three legitimate recognized titles did michalewski have?

good point......which one of the three legitimate recognized titles did michalewski have?

He defended the WBO title 25 times. He won the WBA and IBF from Virgil Hill but was immediately stripped. Graciano Rochigiani was stripped of his WBC title and later awarded 25$ million in damages.

All of these belts by the way. Rochigiani's WBC Michalczewski IBF and WBA were given away to Jones in title elimintor bouts.

ok then. so of the three legitimate recognised titles, he had the wba and ibf once and once only and didn't defend it. thanks for this info....

hatton does not own the WBO cotto does.

ok then. so of the three legitimate recognised titles, he had the wba and ibf once and once only and didn't defend it. thanks for this info....

It would have been better just to say "The WBO is a **** worthless belt" I would have much rather preferred that. It would have been nicer too, and more to the point.

come on bro, it is a semi-legitimate belt..........YOU know this...

from all the champs you listed only 2 or 3 of them are decent.....YOU know this?

come on bro, it is a semi-legitimate belt..........YOU know this...

from all the champs you listed only 2 or 3 of them are decent.....YOU know this?

um... ...

Diego Corrales
Bernard Hopkins
Joe Calzaghe
Zsolst Erdei
Antonio Margarito
Scott Harrison

are as good as any belt holders for any sanctioning organization.

more like:

Corrales - yes
I dont count Hopkins because he didn't fight for this Belt but it was given to him by the WBO & DLH
Calzaghe - yes (but only just)
Margarito - yes and most definitely

u can't be serious about Erdei? Have you seen his defences?? talk about dodgy

thats right.

so i was right.

remember that boxrec has Byrd at 1 and Ruiz at 2.

are we forgetting bob foster, billy conn, and the best ever ezzard charles? no to mention the other moorer, archie

i forgot about conn the rest i mentioned mate.

http://www.titomendoza.com/jonesjrsb12.jpg

Greatest Light Heavyweight, as well as top 10 fighter of all time.

^^^

That look like the dude got KTFO two times in a row and retired.

^^^

That look like the dude got KTFO two times in a row and retired.

Its a good thing he never got knocked out in 16 seconds
Lost to a complete nobody in Kobzev
Lost to a complete journey man in nicholson
and is completely unexciting.

Not to mention he beat a guy named ruiz' ass in his first heavyweight fight. LOL!

Who still the champ? Ruiz thats who. Ha!

Thought you put me on ignore...bwhahaha!

Its a good thing he never got knocked out in 16 seconds
Lost to a complete nobody in Kobzev
Lost to a complete journey man in nicholson
and is completely unexciting.

Not to mention he beat a guy named ruiz' ass in his first heavyweight fight. LOL!



ooooo, TP u just got smoked by run man that was bad ahahahah

i forgot about conn the rest i mentioned mate.



oo :) all of them would beat moorer :)

ooooo, TP u just got smoked by run man that was bad ahahahah

I had to take the punk off ignore just to own him some more. If I go to the store; I take him. He rides shotty cuz he's my whore.

Pretender is a mark.

I had to take the punk off ignore just to own him some more. If I go to the store; I take him. He rides shotty cuz he's my whore.

Pretender is a mark.

E-thug alert!!1! Finally manned up and took me off ignore after I gave you whiplash last week? Guess that post about your mom under the dash in a car wreck really got to you. Heh! I remember slavik had to defend your mom for you.

Ignore is for *******. Dont be a ***** Run.

roy was a super middle fightin at light heavy.. he finally a lightheavy now..roy cleans up his flaws he could go undefeated 4 more years

roy was a super middle fightin at light heavy.. he finally a lightheavy now..roy cleans up his flaws he could go undefeated 4 more years

Gee where I heard that before? Tyson...

roy was a super middle fightin at light heavy.. he finally a lightheavy now..roy cleans up his flaws he could go undefeated 4 more years

sorry mate he is a reflex fighter, these reflexes have got old he will never be the same class of fighter agian. he could fight johnson or tarver another ten times each and not win once.

roy was a great fighter but his time has been and gone now.

I had to take the punk off ignore just to own him some more. If I go to the store; I take him. He rides shotty cuz he's my whore.

Pretender is a mark.


TP is also why i dont post fights anymore in the DL section, i know u all hate me when i talk sturm but i dont have 2000 post saying how he would KO hagler in 1 round.

TP is also why i dont post fights anymore in the DL section, i know u all hate me when i talk sturm but i dont have 2000 post saying how he would KO hagler in 1 round.


i dont hate ya mate.
i quite like ya actually even if i do have a funny way of showing it.

you know that you hug sturm a little so thats cool with me.

we all have our faves

i dont hate ya mate.
i quite like ya actually even if i do have a funny way of showing it.

you know that you hug sturm a little so thats cool with me.

we all have our faves


ya but i used to get called racial names for it even though i aint german lmao

well thats wrong though i do sometimes think the world has gone P.C. mad.

if you can call a brit a limey , an american a yank then why not a german a kraut.

its not offensive to me anyway.

case of double standards in some cases i think. but i digress form the topic

sorry. :hijacked:

it's just a disease of boxing that these guys like spinks and moorer move up from their best weights to heavy due to finacial reasons, moorer could have been an all time great if he had of stayed where he was

just wondering how do you yall think Moorer would have done against Spinks, RJJ, Tarver? Moorer had 22 fights in the LightHW DIV winning all by KO. 10 title defenses all by KO. Could he be the best LightHW of all times? if not Why. I don't think anyone at that weight class could hurt him, but we all know the kind of power moorer has. To bad he was overshadowed by mike tyson. In 1988 moorer fought and won 13 fights by KO including a world title.
Spinks will be regarded, correctly, as a top-five LHeavy of all-time. I believe that Spinks sits at #1 or #2 position for all-time. Moorer's legacy doesn't approach that of Spinks.

roy sucks technically clean up his flaws and he still got plenty speed he be unbeatable..i dont even like roy

well thats wrong though i do sometimes think the world has gone P.C. mad.

if you can call a brit a limey , an american a yank then why not a german a kraut.

its not offensive to me anyway.

case of double standards in some cases i think. but i digress form the topic

sorry. :hijacked:

Americans dont care if you call them yanks, they call themselves yanks (yankees) if they from the northern states. In fact, they proud of that. NY Yankees, yankee doodle dandee, etc. Not the same thing.

Moorer was an excellent Light Heavy and would have given any other Light Heavy a lot of trouble and could have possibly beaten some of them. You want to talk about impressive? How about 22 wins all by KO at 175...

Moorer was a southpaw with a good right jab and a big left hand behind it. He was pretty quick himself and had good power in both hands. It's also logical to think that he took a much better shot at this weight. I don't know if a Roy Jones or a Billy Conn beats him at this weight or not. Ezzard Charles would have beat him just because he was a monster at 175 and could KO someone with either hand backing up. Not to mention he was more skilled than like 80%-90% of all boxers ever.

Archie Moore was a devastating puncher so he would have been an interesting bout for Moorer. I say if Moorer could avoid getting hit with anything too nasty or an accumulation of power shots then he could pull out the decision. I'd bet on Archie wearing him down and dropping him a couple times en route to a late TKO or decision.

Moorer isn't near the top 15 lt. heavyweights of all-time. His record might look nice, but just look at the opposition. Not hall of fame material.

Lt. heavyweights that were greater than Moorer (no particular order)

1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Michael Spinks
4. Sam Langford
5. Bob Foster
6. Gene Tunney
7. Tommy Loughran
8. Billy Conn
9. Maxie Rosenbloom
10. Harold Johnson
11. Roy Jones
12. Matthew Saad Muhammad
13. Jimmy Bivins
14. Philadelphia Jack O'Brien
15. Bob Fitzsimmons
16. Joey Maxim
17. Victor Galindez

...and many, many more.

that is not rjj i like what you did with photoshop.

Moorer isn't near the top 15 lt. heavyweights of all-time. His record might look nice, but just look at the opposition. Not hall of fame material.

Lt. heavyweights that were greater than Moorer (no particular order)

1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Michael Spinks
4. Sam Langford
5. Bob Foster
6. Gene Tunney
7. Tommy Loughran
8. Billy Conn
9. Maxie Rosenbloom
10. Harold Johnson
11. Roy Jones
12. Matthew Saad Muhammad
13. Jimmy Bivins
14. Philadelphia Jack O'Brien
15. Bob Fitzsimmons
16. Joey Maxim
17. Victor Galindez

...and many, many more.


Would you say that these guys would all beat him? Because I certainly don't think that way. I know he really didn't fight anyone at this weight but just looking at the skills he possessed here leads me to believe that he could have stacked up with any other Lt. Heavy ever. We also know that he could get off the canvas to win (unless of course Big George is hitting him).

oo :) all of them would beat moorer :)

IF Moorer can beat Holyfield, why wouldn't you give him a chance against the others. remember he was much more dominate at LHW

http://www.titomendoza.com/jonesjrsb12.jpg

Greatest Light Heavyweight, as well as top 10 fighter of all time.


Roy Jones Jr was not even best Light Heavyweight of his time at let alone best ever. Jones never faced Michalczewski Rochigiani or Michael Nunn. The way Jones got his belts at light heavyweight was Michalczewski was stripped of the WBA because he decided to hang onto his WBO and they would not let him have both at the same time. And he was stripped of the IBF for some other reason. Graciano Rochigiani won the WBC title from winning a split descsioin over Michael Nunn. After he beat Nunn the WBC ordered him to defend the title within 30 days knowing full well he would not be able recover from his fight and train to defend in 30 days. Rochigiani sewed the WBC for that action and was awarded 25$ million dollars. Jones was a paper champion at Light Heavyweight. He never beat any of the other champion. He got all his belts from the stripped titles of Michalczewski and Rochigiani in title eliminators.

Jones never faced any of the champions at Light Heavyweight. He never faced Dariusz Michalczewski who had 25 successfull defences of the WBO title 21 by KO or Rochigiani or Michael Nunn. Michalczewski was the real champion because he beat the champ Virgil Hill for the WBA and IBF and he beat Rochigiani TKO 10 who was the real WBC champion before he was stripped.

Jones ownes anybody at middleweight but Light Heavyweight.....no no no no. Tarver Ko 2 Johnson KO 7 And Glen Johnson "the road warrior" was whipped by several of the guys Michalczewski made defences against.

Spinks will be regarded, correctly, as a top-five LHeavy of all-time. I believe that Spinks sits at #1 or #2 position for all-time. Moorer's legacy doesn't approach that of Spinks.

I understand and agree with you, i just never understood why Moorer never got any credit for what he accomplished there. He was a champion his 1st year. winning 13 fights in his 1st year, winning all by ko, then he ko'd everyone he faced. That has to say something, Defending and winning by ko in every fight.

LOL!

No, Michael Moorer is not the best light heavyweight ever, nor is he even remotely close to being one of the all-time ten best.

****, by far the best fighter he fought at 175 was Leslie Stewart, and Stewart was actually outboxing Moorer in that fight before getting caught in the 8th round. On an all-time scale, Leslie Stewart ain't ****, so you could just imagine what the elite all-timers at this weight would've done to Moorer.

LOL!

No, Michael Moorer is not the best light heavyweight ever, nor is he even remotely close to being one of the all-time ten best.

****, by far the best fighter he fought at 175 was Leslie Stewart, and Stewart was actually outboxing Moorer in that fight before getting caught in the 8th round. On an all-time scale, Leslie Stewart ain't ****, so you could just imagine what the elite all-timers at this weight would've done to Moorer.

whats that out box him until 9 or 10 rounds before being KO'd?
i guess moorer will never get his just Due, dispite being LHW champ and 2 time world HW champ.

being the world heavy champ doesnt mean anything at your light heavy career :)

being the world heavy champ doesnt mean anything at your light heavy career :)

I think Michalczewski's 25 consecutive defences 21 by KO meant something. Also his accomplishment in defeating WBA IBF champ Virgil Hill and WBC Champion Graciano Rochigiani. I think Rochigiani beating Nunn for the WBC meant something.

being the world heavy champ doesnt mean anything at your light heavy career :)

u r 100% correct, i just pointing out the fact that Moorer has never received the proper respect for his accomplishment. This whole thing about last night when i was watching the Foreman vs Moorer story. and begin to wonder why he was never mentioned among the great LHW or HW's

I think Michalczewski's 25 consecutive defences 21 by KO meant something. Also his accomplishment in defeating WBA IBF champ Virgil Hill and WBC Champion Graciano Rochigiani. I think Rochigiani beating Nunn for the WBC meant something.

that means alot, i can't really comment on Him because i can't recall ever seeing him fight. I'm sure most people on here hasn't seen many of his fights and are unable to agree with you. But that is very impressive.

u r 100% correct, i just pointing out the fact that Moorer has never received the proper respect for his accomplishment. This whole thing about last night when i was watching the Foreman vs Moorer story. and begin to wonder why he was never mentioned among the great LHW or HW's

Michael Moore is not above Michalczewski on all time Lt Heavyweights list. He only defended the WBO title 9 times against worse opposition than Michalczewski. All his defences were by KO. But Michalczewski 25 defences 21 by KO is better. All Moore's defences were against absolute nobodie.

Michalczewski beat

Virgil Hill

Montell Griffin (beat Toney twice Beat Jones by DQ....Griffin ahead on points at time of stoppage.

Drake Thadzi (beat Toney by descison)

beat some other guys that beat Glen Johnson

bet Graciano Rochigiani

Derick Harmon

u r 100% correct, i just pointing out the fact that Moorer has never received the proper respect for his accomplishment. This whole thing about last night when i was watching the Foreman vs Moorer story. and begin to wonder why he was never mentioned among the great LHW or HW's


i think that only do to the fact that in a rematch to holy he was tko'd and to most peopel he is the dude that got KO'd by foreman

i think alot of european fighters arent givin alot fo credit cause they dont fight in the USA, DM beat hill he was THE champ so i dotn see why people didnt go over and fight him at his home town, so he was stipped, i also havent seen him fight. its a shame he wasnt seen more by US veiwers

Record Mike Moorer Time


| Referee: Frank Cappuccino | Judge: Bill McConkey 70-60 | Judge: Chuck Williams 70-61 | Judge: Paddy Grimes 70-60 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1990-08-21 177 Jim MacDonald 29-9-0
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 3 0
1990-04-28 174 Mario Oscar Melo 174 18-4-0
Trump Taj Mahal, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W KO 1 12
~ Time: 1:52 | Referee: Joe O'Neil | Judge: Frank Cairo | Judge: Tomas Vasquez | Judge: Ismael W. Fernandez ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1990-02-03 175 Marcellus Allen 175 12-0-0
Convention Hall, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W TKO 9 12
~ Referee: Frank Cappuccino | Judge: Antonio Palermo 90-80 | Judge: Robert Balogh 90-81 | Judge: Frank Brunette 89-81 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title
Corner Retirement

1989-12-22 175 Mike Sedillo 175 22-6-0
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 6 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-11-16 175 Jeff Thompson 175 20-1-0
International Hotel & Resorts, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W TKO 1 12
~ Time: 1:46 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-06-25 173 Leslie Stewart 27-4-0
Convention Center, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W TKO 8 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-04-22 171 Freddie Delgado 171 16-0-1
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 1 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-02-19 174 Frankie Swindell 175 15-2-0
Monessen, PA, USA W TKO 6 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-01-14 175 Victor Claudio 173¼ 11-6-0
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 2 12
~ Referee: Sam Williams ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1988-12-03 174½

Would you say that these guys would all beat him? Because I certainly don't think that way. I know he really didn't fight anyone at this weight but just looking at the skills he possessed here leads me to believe that he could have stacked up with any other Lt. Heavy ever. We also know that he could get off the canvas to win (unless of course Big George is hitting him).

You pretty much made my argument for me. "He really didn't fight anyone at" lt. heavyweight. When assessing a fighter's skills, you must take into account level of opposition. I'm sure i could look like Sugar Ray Robinson if i were fighting against elderly women. That doesn't mean i'm on the same level of Ray Robinson.

The fighters i previously mentioned proved their skill against viable opposition. At 175, Moorer beat no one of real significance.

i think that only do to the fact that in a rematch to holy he was tko'd and to most peopel he is the dude that got KO'd by foreman

U r right, but people should try to understand that, it was HOLYFIELD AND FOREMAN. 2 Of the best ever. There is no way anyone that was mentioned on this thread beats Holy or Foreman

Record Mike Moorer Time


| Referee: Frank Cappuccino | Judge: Bill McConkey 70-60 | Judge: Chuck Williams 70-61 | Judge: Paddy Grimes 70-60 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1990-08-21 177 Jim MacDonald 29-9-0
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 3 0
1990-04-28 174 Mario Oscar Melo 174 18-4-0
Trump Taj Mahal, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W KO 1 12
~ Time: 1:52 | Referee: Joe O'Neil | Judge: Frank Cairo | Judge: Tomas Vasquez | Judge: Ismael W. Fernandez ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1990-02-03 175 Marcellus Allen 175 12-0-0
Convention Hall, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W TKO 9 12
~ Referee: Frank Cappuccino | Judge: Antonio Palermo 90-80 | Judge: Robert Balogh 90-81 | Judge: Frank Brunette 89-81 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title
Corner Retirement

1989-12-22 175 Mike Sedillo 175 22-6-0
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 6 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-11-16 175 Jeff Thompson 175 20-1-0
International Hotel & Resorts, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W TKO 1 12
~ Time: 1:46 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-06-25 173 Leslie Stewart 27-4-0
Convention Center, Atlantic City, NJ, USA W TKO 8 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-04-22 171 Freddie Delgado 171 16-0-1
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 1 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-02-19 174 Frankie Swindell 175 15-2-0
Monessen, PA, USA W TKO 6 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1989-01-14 175 Victor Claudio 173¼ 11-6-0
The Palace, Auburn Hills, MI, USA W TKO 2 12
~ Referee: Sam Williams ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

1988-12-03 174½

thanks, good info. I see alot of early KO's

Dariusz Michalczewski record

Derrick Harmon 174¾ 23-3-0
W KO 9
~ Referee: Eddie Cotton ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174¾ Richard Hall 174¾ 25-3-0
W TKO 10
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174¾ Joey DeGrandis 174 29-4-0
W KO 2
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174½ Richard Hall 173½ 25-2-0
W TKO 11
WBO Light Heavyweight Title


175 Alejandro Lakatus 174½ 15-0-1
W KO 9
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174 Ka-Dy King 174 24-3-0
W TKO 7
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

175 Graciano Rocchigiani 175 40-4-1
W TKO 10
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

175 Montell Griffin 175 38-2-0
W TKO 4
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174¼ Muslim Biarslanov 174¾ 24-3-1
W TKO 7
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174 Drake Thadzi 30-8-1
W TKO 9
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

174¾ Mark Prince 173¾ 18-0-0
W KO 8
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

Andrea Magi 175 20-3-0
W TKO 4
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

175 Darren Zenner 175 21-2-2
W TKO 6
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

175 Nicky Piper 174½ 26-4-2
W TKO 7
WBO Light Heavyweight Title


Virgil Hill 173¾ 43-1-0
W UD 12
WBA Light Heavyweight Title
WBO Light Heavyweight Title
IBF Light Heavyweight Title

Christophe Girard 31-3-0
W TKO 8
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

Graciano Rocchigiani 173 38-3-1
W DQ 7 ~
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

Christophe Girard 175 31-2-0
W UD 12
~ WBO Light Heavyweight Title

Asluddin Umarov 174¼ 15-2-0
W TKO 5
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

Philippe Michel 173 20-3-0
W UD 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

175 Everardo Armenta 174½ 20-5-0
W KO 5
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

172¾ Paul Carlo 174¼ 17-2-0
W KO 4
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

Roberto Dominguez Perez 173 17-2-0
W KO 2
WBO Light Heavyweight Title


Néstor Hipólito Giovannini 182 36-7-3
W KO 10
WBO Cruiserweight Title

Leeonzer Barber 174 19-1-0
W UD 12
WBO Light Heavyweight Title

lookign at ezzard charles record, he really has only beat archie moore and joey maxim there, also he has never won a light heavy title, it seems to me that charles had a better career at heavy then light heavy maybe we should take him off the list

thanks, good info. I see alot of early KO's

You see a lot of early KO's, but my own curiousity got the better of me and I decided to see just who Moorer was knocking out. So I took a look at a bunch of Ring ratings from the time when Moorer was fighting in the light heavyweight division (around 89/90), and besides Leslie Stewart, the only other Moorer opponent who was ranked in ANY of the numerous rankings I looked at was Mike Sedillo (ranked 9th in Feb 1990 edition). That's it.

Sorry, but there's no ****ing way a fighter is going to get all-time consideration by beating only TWO fighters who were thought of as being good enough to warrant a top ten spot in that division or any division.

lookign at ezzard charles record, he really has only beat archie moore and joey maxim there, also he has never won a light heavy title, it seems to me that charles had a better career at heavy then light heavy maybe we should take him off the list

I think you need to look a little bit harder if all you see on Charles' light heavyweight resume are the names of Archie Moore and Joey Maxim.

You can start with Booker Beckwith (who Charles KO'd), who was the number one light heavyweight contender in November of 1941. Or Teddy Yarosz, who was a mainstay in the light heavyweight rankings throughout much of that time. Or Anton Christoforidis (KO'd by Charles), who was a former NBA light heavyweight champion and highly ranked contender when he met Charles. Or Elmer "Violent" Ray, who was the most feared and biggest punching heavyweight of those days (it's been said Joe Louis was reluctant to give Ray a title shot). Or a couple of the famed "Muderer's Row" members, Lloyd Marshall and HOF'er, Jimmy Bivins, both which Charles defeated on a number of occasions. Oakland Billy Smith, Sam Baroudi, etc...

Charles beat a hell of a lot more than just Moore and Maxim during his light heavyweight tenure, my friend.

Moorer I hear was a crazy light heavyweight

He should have stayed with Emanuel

I think you need to look a little bit harder if all you see on Charles' light heavyweight resume are the names of Archie Moore and Joey Maxim.

You can start with Booker Beckwith (who Charles KO'd), who was the number one light heavyweight contender in November of 1941. Or Teddy Yarosz, who was a mainstay in the light heavyweight rankings throughout much of that time. Or Anton Christoforidis (KO'd by Charles), who was a former NBA light heavyweight champion and highly ranked contender when he met Charles. Or Elmer "Violent" Ray, who was the most feared and biggest punching heavyweight of those days (it's been said Joe Louis was reluctant to give Ray a title shot). Or a couple of the famed "Muderer's Row" members, Lloyd Marshall and HOF'er, Jimmy Bivins, both which Charles defeated on a number of occasions. Oakland Billy Smith, Sam Baroudi, etc...

Charles beat a hell of a lot more than just Moore and Maxim during his light heavyweight tenure, my friend.

never heard of any of them guys, and he lost to ray first

Moorer could've given any all time Lt. Heavy a good fight because: 1- He was a big for that weight class, like 6'2 or 6'3. 2-Had monster power in both hands & was a very aggressive fighter. 3- His chin was better at that weight than heavy. He jumped 2 weight classes to fight the big boys & did well for a while. His lack of focus in/out of the ring was his downfall.

moore beat maxim ,harold johnson both hall of famers and held the belt till he was 48 best ever is archie moore..woulda beat marciano if the ref aint cheat

By the way Virgil Hill fought both Michalczewski and Jones. In fact he fought Jones the fight right after he lost to Michalczewski and he said Michalczewski would beat Jones if they fought in his opinion at Lt Heavyweight.

Virgil Hill is an overlooked Lt Heavyweight as well if you look at his record. He lost to Thomas Hearns in 1991, Michalczewski in June 1997, Jones in April 1998. Those are his only losses at Lt Heavy.

He should be in the top 10 Lt Heavyweights of all time.

He made 12 defences of the WBA Lt Heavyweight title before loosing to Hearns in 1991. Then he made 10 more defences of the WBA Lt Heavyweight title before loosing to Michalczewski in 1997. And he captured the IBF Lt Heavyweight title as well before loosing to Michalczewski in June 1997.

lookign at ezzard charles record, he really has only beat archie moore and joey maxim there, also he has never won a light heavy title, it seems to me that charles had a better career at heavy then light heavy maybe we should take him off the list

ONLY archie moore?

are you serious? he only beat the fighter with the most KOs in boxing history every time they met

this ezzard charles must have been a nobody...
:rolleyes:

Dariusz Michalczewski is a top 10 all time Light Heayweight. 24 title defences of WBO belt 21 by KO, and he beat all the champions Virgil Hill who had WBA IBF and Rochigiani who had the WBC. Virgil Hill is also a top 10 all time Lt Heavyweight.

Moorer isn't near the top 15 lt. heavyweights of all-time. His record might look nice, but just look at the opposition. Not hall of fame material.

Lt. heavyweights that were greater than Moorer (no particular order)

1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Michael Spinks
4. Sam Langford
5. Bob Foster
6. Gene Tunney
7. Tommy Loughran
8. Billy Conn
9. Maxie Rosenbloom
10. Harold Johnson
11. Roy Jones
12. Matthew Saad Muhammad
13. Jimmy Bivins
14. Philadelphia Jack O'Brien
15. Bob Fitzsimmons
16. Joey Maxim
17. Victor Galindez

...and many, many more.


is qawi included in your many, many more?
he would definitely made my list in the ones better than MM, also how do you rate tunney and charles?
I always change my mind on the subject, and I have trouble with the 175 division in general: it had a lot of great champs, but there are only a few eras with more than one great 175er: 40s, early 80s

but like someone said earlier, so many possibly great 175er moved on to HW bcos of money,
byrd & moorer both had a great potential but in terms of achievements they are definitely not comparable to the greats

is qawi included in your many, many more?
he would definitely made my list in the ones better than DM, also how do you rate tunney and charles?
I always change my mind on the subject, and I have trouble with the 175 division in general: it had a lot of great champs, but there are only a few eras with more than one great 175er: 40s, early 80s


didn't quawi fight almost entire carreer at cruiser.

Quawi had 4 title defences at Lt Heavyweight before loosing to Michael Spinks. But you rate him above Michalczewski who had 24 title defences 21 by KO and unified the belts practically. that is quite ridiculous.

didn't quawi fight almost entire carreer at cruiser.

I think 50-50 and after the holy fights he was not the same, so his prime would mostly be at 175

by the way in the previous post I meant double m, but than i realized it looked exactly like darius m, and I had to change it

I think 50-50 and after the holy fights he was not the same, so his prime would mostly be at 175

by the way in the previous post I meant double m, but than i realized it looked exactly like darius m, and I had to change it

He fought Holyfield way after he left the Lt Heavyweight and went to cruiser. His last fight at Lt Heavy was in 1983 he fougth Holyfield hte first time at Cruiser in 1987.

Quawi is maybe an all time great top 10 cruiserweight but no way an all time great Light Heavyweight.

Oh Quawi had 4 title defences at Lt Heavyweight before loosing to Michael Spinks. But you rate him above Michalczewski. that is quite ridiculous. After he lost to Spinks he left Lt heavy forever.

anyway I rank him above dm and I don't know about jones, too

in those days there were 4 great 175er... they were so good, that one went on to cruiserweight champ, one went to on to be HW lineal champ.

and they gave hell one another for a few years, then spinks ruled and they all moved up/retired

level of opposition makes a difference for me, DM never fought someone like spinks or saad muhammad

He fought Holyfield way after he left the Lt Heavyweight and went to cruiser. His last fight at Lt Heavy was in 1983 he fougth Holyfield hte first time at Cruiser in 1987.

yea, and after those fights he was not the same, so most of his prime is at 175, which is exactly what I said

yea, and after those fights he was not the same, so most of his prime is at 175, which is exactly what I said

His prime was not at 175. Look at his record. He became famous and gained most titles as a cruiserweight. He fought a bunch of bumbs like his first 20 fights like most fighters do, that was at light heavy. Then he fough like 5 serious opponents at Lt heavy and lost to Spinks in 1983. Then he became famous as a cruiserweight. He definitely was not in his prime at Light Heavy. He was in his prime at Cruiser before he fought Holy. Between 1983 and 1987-88. Go to boxrec dude. You seriously need to. You are very confused on this issue. Dwight Quawi as all time great Lt Heavy...give me a break. 4 title defences and bumb fights was all he did at Lt heavy. His whole career was mostly at Cruiser. He was Champion at cruiser. Then when he got really old he went up to heavy probably because he just could make the Cruiser limit anymore. Quawi was a great cruiserweight He gave Holyfield hell.

Go here and get educated son. Then come back and we can have a serious discusssion


Quawi's Boxrec record.

http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=000325

How in any fascination of the imagination does beating Saad Muhammad twice for a WBA title defence and Jerry Martin and Eddie Davis for a title defence make you an all time great Lt Heavyweight. Explain this to me please.

How in any fascination of the imagination does beating Saad Muhammad twice for a WBA title defence and Jerry Martin and Eddie Davis for a title defence make you an all time great Lt Heavyweight. Explain this to me please.

look "son" I know how to use boxrec, I looked at it when you asked if qawi fought at cruiser

1)fighting at 181 is "not making the 175 limit" more than fighting at cruiser, so make hia prime at cruiser 84-86, look at his record after the 1st holy fight and you know that losing to a stepping stone is not the sign of a prime fighter, which is not a big surprise, (actually, the fact that one of them went on to be even better after the fight was more of a suprise)

2) how do 2 defenses of your title make you great cruiser if 4 at 175 don't make you a great at 175?

3) does stopping matt saad muhammad twice makes you an all time great 175? maybe not top 10, but definitely better than DM and MM

anyway see point 2 and have a serious discussion with yourself

McKay, boxrec gives you very little education when discussing the fighters in question, so I don't see why you think someone is going to get an "education" from a trip over there.

And yes, Braxton/Qawi's prime was at light heavyweight, and anybody who was around back then would tell you the exact same thing. He never once made the p4p top 10 as a CW, but as a LH in 1982, there he is at number ten (the only time he appeared on such lists)

And you criticize Braxton's LH opponents as being "bums"?

Braxton came up like a ball of fire and won the ESPN LH tournament, just before beating the crap out of the quick and talented former WBA champion, Mike Rossman. Rossman was a nice talent, who could box nearly as well as anybody in the division during that era. That's the fight that made Braxton "famous", not his run in the cruiserweight division, cause it was live on national/network television and people got to see his destruction of Rossman for themselves.

James "Superman" Scott was considered one of the toughest and best light heavyweights of the day (ranked #2 in '79, #3 in '80, and #5 in '81 by The Ring). Scott was a strong, tough and aggressive, volume puncher, but when he fought Braxton, he became a bit of a ***** cat, and did his best to not engage the little "Buzzsaw". Scott's one of the best light heavyweights of recent times to never have won a world title, and that's mainly because the champions didn't want to travel to Rahway to face him.

Jerry "The Bull" Martin was another highly ranked light heavyweight contender from that era (#4 in '80 and '81). Martin beat Scott in a previous meeting, but he wasn't thought of quite as highly as "Superman". Still, he was a damn good fighter, and certainly a far cry from the "bum" that you may think he is.

I don't need to really describe Matthew Saad Muhammad (you SHOULD know even a little something about this HOF'er, I'd hope), who Braxton defeated/dominated twice. But he was certainly one of the best light heavyweights that there's been in the last 30 years or so.

And Eddie Davis was also a very talented and pretty slick light heavyweight of that time. Davis also gave Spinks a very difficult test, and certainly Braxton had an easier time with him than did Michael.

Here's what Ring magazine says about Braxton's little run a light heavyweight and those opponents;

"But in a four-year span, he went 18-0 (12), beating ELITE fighters like Mike Rossman, James Scott, Jerry Martin, Eddie Davis, and Matthew Saad Muhammad (twice)."

I was around back then, and I'm certainly going to trust my own opinion of those fighters. But, as a secondary opinion, I'll gladly take The Ring's references of those fighters being "elite" over your assumptions that those fighters were "bums".

Educate yourself beyond a short trip over to boxrec, cause that site tells you very little about what the fighters are really all about.

McKay, boxrec gives you very little education when discussing the fighters in question, so I don't see why you think someone is going to get an "education" from a trip over there.

And yes, Braxton/Qawi's prime was at light heavyweight, and anybody who was around back then would tell you the exact same thing. He never once made the p4p top 10 as a CW, but as a LH in 1982, there he is at number ten (the only time he appeared on such lists)

And you criticize Braxton's LH opponents as being "bums"?

Braxton came up like a ball of fire and won the ESPN LH tournament, just before beating the crap out of the quick and talented former WBA champion, Mike Rossman. Rossman was a nice talent, who could box nearly as well as anybody in the division during that era. That's the fight that made Braxton "famous", not his run in the cruiserweight division, cause it was live on national/network television and people got to see his destruction of Rossman for themselves.

James "Superman" Scott was considered one of the toughest and best light heavyweights of the day (ranked #2 in '79, #3 in '80, and #5 in '81 by The Ring). Scott was a strong, tough and aggressive, volume puncher, but when he fought Braxton, he became a bit of a ***** cat, and did his best to not engage the little "Buzzsaw". Scott's one of the best light heavyweights of recent times to never have won a world title, and that's mainly because the champions didn't want to travel to Rahway to face him.

Jerry "The Bull" Martin was another highly ranked light heavyweight contender from that era (#4 in '80 and '81). Martin beat Scott in a previous meeting, but he wasn't thought of quite as highly as "Superman". Still, he was a damn good fighter, and certainly a far cry from the "bum" that you may think he is.

I don't need to really describe Matthew Saad Muhammad (you SHOULD know even a little something about this HOF'er, I'd hope), who Braxton defeated/dominated twice. But he was certainly one of the best light heavyweights that there's been in the last 30 years or so.

And Eddie Davis was also a very talented and pretty slick light heavyweight of that time. Davis also gave Spinks a very difficult test, and certainly Braxton had an easier time with him than did Michael.

Here's what Ring magazine says about Braxton's little run a light heavyweight and those opponents;

"But in a four-year span, he went 18-0 (12), beating ELITE fighters like Mike Rossman, James Scott, Jerry Martin, Eddie Davis, and Matthew Saad Muhammad (twice)."

I was around back then, and I'm certainly going to trust my own opinion of those fighters. But, as a secondary opinion, I'll gladly take The Ring's references of those fighters being "elite" over your assumptions that those fighters were "bums".

Educate yourself beyond a short trip over to boxrec, cause that site tells you very little about what the fighters are really all about.


Game, set, match.

Yogi, nice post. I agree wholeheartedly. People need to realize that boxrec provides very little, if any, insight on a fighter. In fact, many of the records they post are incomplete. For example, when a fighter's record reads 0-0-0, that doesn't mean he has never fought before, but that his record is unavailable or unknown.

Anyways, records barely scratch the surface on a fighter's greatness.

McKay, boxrec gives you very little education when discussing the fighters in question, so I don't see why you think someone is going to get an "education" from a trip over there.

And yes, Braxton/Qawi's prime was at light heavyweight, and anybody who was around back then would tell you the exact same thing. He never once made the p4p top 10 as a CW, but as a LH in 1982, there he is at number ten (the only time he appeared on such lists)

And you criticize Braxton's LH opponents as being "bums"?

Braxton came up like a ball of fire and won the ESPN LH tournament, just before beating the crap out of the quick and talented former WBA champion, Mike Rossman. Rossman was a nice talent, who could box nearly as well as anybody in the division during that era. That's the fight that made Braxton "famous", not his run in the cruiserweight division, cause it was live on national/network television and people got to see his destruction of Rossman for themselves.

James "Superman" Scott was considered one of the toughest and best light heavyweights of the day (ranked #2 in '79, #3 in '80, and #5 in '81 by The Ring). Scott was a strong, tough and aggressive, volume puncher, but when he fought Braxton, he became a bit of a ***** cat, and did his best to not engage the little "Buzzsaw". Scott's one of the best light heavyweights of recent times to never have won a world title, and that's mainly because the champions didn't want to travel to Rahway to face him.

Jerry "The Bull" Martin was another highly ranked light heavyweight contender from that era (#4 in '80 and '81). Martin beat Scott in a previous meeting, but he wasn't thought of quite as highly as "Superman". Still, he was a damn good fighter, and certainly a far cry from the "bum" that you may think he is.

I don't need to really describe Matthew Saad Muhammad (you SHOULD know even a little something about this HOF'er, I'd hope), who Braxton defeated/dominated twice. But he was certainly one of the best light heavyweights that there's been in the last 30 years or so.

And Eddie Davis was also a very talented and pretty slick light heavyweight of that time. Davis also gave Spinks a very difficult test, and certainly Braxton had an easier time with him than did Michael.

Here's what Ring magazine says about Braxton's little run a light heavyweight and those opponents;

"But in a four-year span, he went 18-0 (12), beating ELITE fighters like Mike Rossman, James Scott, Jerry Martin, Eddie Davis, and Matthew Saad Muhammad (twice)."

I was around back then, and I'm certainly going to trust my own opinion of those fighters. But, as a secondary opinion, I'll gladly take The Ring's references of those fighters being "elite" over your assumptions that those fighters were "bums".

Educate yourself beyond a short trip over to boxrec, cause that site tells you very little about what the fighters are really all about.

No way is is he all time top ten Light heavy for beating Muhammad twice and those 2 other Jamokes to defend the WBA belt 4 times in total. I dont care what ring magainze has to say about it.

Dwight Quawi is not a top 10 all time Lt Heavyweight for making 4 title defences against average competition before loosing the belt to Michael Spinks and moving up to cruiser.

3) does stopping matt saad muhammad twice makes you an all time great 175? maybe not top 10, but definitely better than DM and MM

anyway see point 2 and have a serious discussion with yourself


Michalczewski is definitely a top 10 all time Light Heavyweight. Quawi is nowhere near the list of all time top Lt Heavies.

Michalczewski made 24 consecutive defences of the WBO title 21 of the defences coming by way of KO. Who has a longer streak than that in title defences for Lt Heavy. Plus Michalczewski was the first man to beat Virgil Hill since Thomas Hearns beat him in 1991 capturing Virgil's IBF and WBA titles. On top of that Michalczewski beat Graciano Rochigiani who was the real WBC champion who won his title by beating a game Michael Nunn. Graciano Rochigiani was told by the WBC that he had to defend the title within 30 days of his bout with Michael Nunn. He was nunable to meat the obligation and the WBC knew he would not be able to. So they stripped him of the belt, Rochigiani sued the WBC for that action and was awarded 25$ million in damages. And gave off to Roy Jones Jr in an eliminator, same as they did with Michalczewski's IBF and WBA titles. Jones never fought any of the champions in the Lt heavyweight division. He never fought Michalczewski, he never fought Rochigiani he never fought Nunn, yet the sanctioning bodies game him all the belts in bull**** eliminators.


All time great Light Heavyweights (top 10_)

Dariusz Michalczewski 24 consecutive title defences 21 by KO
including

TKO 10 Graciano Rochigiani

TKO 4 Montell Griffin ( who beat Jones by DQ...Griffin was ahead on points at the time of the stoppage and won two descisons against James Toney

Drake Thadzi KO (holds a descsion win over James Toney

Derick Harmon KO (holds a win of Glen Johnson)

and other guys of top notch championship caliber.


Virgil Hill 12 title defences of WBA lightheavyweight title before loosing to hearns in 1991. Regained WBA title and made 10 more defences and gained IBF title in the process before loosing to Michalczewski in 1997. Virgil Hill's only losses at Lt Heavyweight came from Thomas Hearns Michalczewski and Jones in that order. Hill fought Jones the fight directly after Hill lost to Michalczewski.


Quawi is not in the same leauge as Michalczewski or Virgil Hill as far as all time Lt heavies are concerned. Michalczewski and Hill are solid top 10 Lt heavyweights for all time. Michalczewski I think probably has the all time record for most consecutive title defences at 24 for and he won 21 of them by KO. (The Light Heavyweight Record for consecutive title defences)

Quawi is pathetic in comparison 4 title defenses to Saad Mummad twice and 2 other guys of lower caliber. Everybody else besides that he fought at Lt heavy were total bumbs.

McKay you just got taught a history lesson about something you obviously don't know like the back of your hand (Qawi, MSM and the Lt. Heavy seen at that time) and now you're reduced to calling people dickheads and using defense mechanisms. Sometimes you just have to take what people have told you into consideration and realize that you may not be 100% correct. Just a thought.

One other thing Jerry Martin sucks. That is one of Quawi's tremendous 4 defences that you claim makes him all time top 10.

Eddie Davis sucks he lost a guy not long before fighting Quawi that was 11-11 and he lost to less than a world beater in Marvin Johnson shortly after loosing to Quawi. Saad Muhammad is a solid opponent, Saad Muhaamad is the only solid opponent Quawi faced. It seems though Saad Muhammad was way passed his prime when he faced Quawi.

Saad Muhammad's following 5 fights after loosing to Quawi
L TKO 3 Eric Winbush 11-6
W KO 10 Larry Davis 9-24
L TKO 11 Willie Edwards 17-1
W TKO 6 Chris Wells 13-15
L PTS Uriah Grant 7-2

Quite obvious Muhammad was way way way past his prime when Quawi faced him. Quawi beat Muhammae twice and Winbush beat him once. So I guess Winbush should be in your top 20 all time then too if we are to follow that logic.

Your saying this bull**** record competes with Michalczewski's all time record of 24 consecutive title defences 21 by KO and Virgil Hill's in total 22 title defences. That is totally ridiculous.

The only thing people remember Quawi for was his war with HOlyfield at cruiserweight, nothing else.

No way is is he all time top ten Light heavy for beating Muhammad twice and those 2 other Jamokes to defend the WBA belt 4 times in total. I dont care what ring magainze has to say about it.

Swooooosh!

The whole point of my post went completely over your head, didn't it? Apparently so.

If you can find where I mentioned that Braxton/Qawi should be considered one of the ten greatest light heavyweights of all-time, that might make this post of yours (which quotes mine) just slightly more than utterly and friggin' pointless.

As they say...Ignorance is bliss!

P.S. Considering you have such a high opinion of fighters who make a bunch of meaningless title defenses, I assume you must rate Samson Dutch Boy Gym right up there with the greatest fighters of all-time, yes?

*McKay runs off to boxrec to find out who that is, as is his normal custom when discussing fighters he knows absolutely nothing about*

Swooooosh!

The whole point of my post went completely over your head, didn't it? Apparently so.

If you can find where I mentioned that Braxton/Qawi should be considered one of the ten greatest light heavyweights of all-time, that might make this post of yours (which quotes mine) just slightly more than utterly and friggin' pointless.

As they say...Ignorance is bliss!

P.S. Considering you have such a high opinion of fighters who make a bunch of meaningless title defenses, I assume you must rate Samson Dutch Boy Gym right up there with the greatest fighters of all-time, yes?

Somebody else said than that Dwight Braxton should be rated higher all time at light heavyweight than Michalczewski, the man who holds the all time record for consecutive title defences and Virgil Hill. Sorry if it was not you. But Quawi was not **** at Lt heavyweight really.
*McKay runs off to boxrec to find out who that is, as is his normal custom when discussing fighters he knows absolutely nothing about*

Somebody else said than that Dwight Braxton should be rated higher all time at light heavyweight than the man who holds the all time record for consecutive title defences(Michalczewski) and Virgil Hill. Sorry if it was not you, but that kind of utter turd**** can not go uncorrected.

*McKay runs off to boxrec to find out who that is, as is his normal custom when discussing fighters he knows absolutely nothing about*

Nobody knows nothing about Quawi because he is a blip on the radar screen in the obscure annals of boxing only known for his brutal fights at cruiserweight with Evander Holyfield. If Braxton Never fought Holyfiled, Nobody would have any idea who he was. Braxton's finest hour was his loosing but noble effort against Holyfield at cruiserweight.

And its seriously nothign other than retarded to contend that this guy is some kind of Lt Heavyweight Legend.

Nobody knows nothing about Quawi because he is a blip on the radar screen in the obscure annals of boxing only known for his brutal fights at cruiserweight with Evander Holyfield. If Braxton Never fought Holyfiled, Nobody would have any idea who he was. Braxton's finest hour was his loosing but noble effort against Holyfield at cruiserweight.

And its seriously nothign other than retarded to contend that this guy is some kind of Lt Heavyweight Legend.

Just cause you don't have a friggin clue as to who Braxton was as a light heavyweight doesn't mean there aren't plenty of boxing fans who are/were aware of how good this guy was in his light heavyweight days.

And yeah, I had a very good idea who Braxton was when he fought in that ESPN tournament and especially after seeing him demolish Rossman on network television (which certainly opposes your "nobody would know who he is if he didn't fight Holyfield" comment).

Hey McKay, I'm forced to ask this...How many fights have you actually seen of Braxton's from his light heavyweight days? I guessing none, because you seem to be forming your opinion of him entirely by running over to boxrec. But nonetheless, amuse me with an answer to that question, would you?

Just cause you don't have a friggin clue as to who Braxton was as a light heavyweight doesn't mean there aren't plenty of boxing fans who are/were aware of how good this guy was in his light heavyweight days.

And yeah, I had a very good idea who Braxton was when he fought in that ESPN tournament and especially after seeing him demolish Rossman on network television (which certainly opposes your "nobody would know who he is if he didn't fight Holyfield" comment).

Hey McKay, I'm forced to ask this...How many fights have you actually seen of Braxton's from his light heavyweight days? I guessing none, because you seem to be forming your opinion of him entirely by running over to boxrec. But nonetheless, amuse me with an answer to that question, would you?


He only fought 5 half way decent guys at Light Heavyweight, Why should I know who he is. His **** was probably not even TV worthy back then in 1982.

I am going to get the calculator out. and calculate the combined win loss total of Braxton's opponents at Lt Heavyweight.

While you're at it, Ranger, can you please tell me why Lamar Clark isn't even close to being considered a better heavyweight than the previously mentioned, Evander Holyfield (Clark had a much better win/loss record than Evander)?

P.S. From the Rossman fight, Braxton had every one of his light heavyweight fights broadcast on network television.

I am going to get the calculator out. and calculate the combined win loss total of Braxton's opponents at Lt Heavyweight.

Records can be deceiving & just because you might be undefeated you could have a padded record. Prime example is Ricky Hatton. Jose Luis Castillo has 7 defeats to his name & that guy is a badass. Emanuel has over 15 losses & is a hellava fighter. Don't get too caught up in the stats of boxing because it can be deceiving.

Its not about win loss percentages. Its about title defences. If you make title defences your facing quality opposition. In that the very least your facing the mandatory #1 contenders on a consistant basis. You say having alot title defences means nothing. I think that is ridiculous.

Records can be deceiving & just because you might be undefeated you could have a padded record. Prime example is Ricky Hatton. Jose Luis Castillo has 7 defeats to his name & that guy is a badass. Emanuel has over 15 losses & is a hellava fighter. Don't get too caught up in the stats of boxing because it can be deceiving.

I am not obsessing or have ever obsessed about win loss records. I am just saying Virgil Hill is an all time great Lt Heavy because his only losses were to Thomas Hearns Michalczewski, and Roy Jones. And he made a combined total of 22 title defences and at one point before facing Michalczewski had the WBA and IBF titles.

Michalczewski made 24 consecutive tital defences 21 by knockout. Against quality opposition such as Virgil Hill (WBA IBF champ) Graciano Rochigiani (WBC cham) Montell Griffin
Drake Thazdi, Derick Harmon and others. Derick Harmon for instance beat Glen Johnson. Its amazing feat to have 24 consecutive defences and 21 by KO. That is why only one man has ever done it. And it earns him at a right at least in the top 10 best Light heavies of all time. In front of guys like Michael Moore who had 9 defences of the WBO belt against much weaker opposition and not against any other title holders.

Its not about win loss percentages. Its about title defences. If you make title defences your facing quality opposition. In that the very least your facing the mandatory #1 contenders on a consistant basis. You say having alot title defences means nothing. I think that is ridiculous.

In your opinion, whose the much greater fighter between Sam Langford and Samson Dutch Boy Gym?

One of them never made a single title defense in his whole boxing career. And the other one made close to 40 defenses of a "meaningless" super flyweight title.

In your opinion, whose the much greater fighter between Sam Langford and Samson Dutch Boy Gym?

One of them never made a single title defense in his whole boxing career. And the other one made close to 40 defenses of a "meaningless" super flyweight title.

If you have a belt you are forced to fight quality oppositon, you are forced to take on the #1 mandatories. If you are making title defences you are by default fighting the highest quality opposition available.

Even though the ranking systems do get wierd at times, you are at the very least fighting guys in the range of top contenders.

id put bob foster over sam langford, id put more but sam had a long career and ive never seen him fight, if he wasnt any good id put gene tunny and conn over him as well

If you have a belt you are forced to fight quality oppositon, you are forced to take on the #1 mandatories. If you are making title defences you are by default fighting the highest quality opposition available.

Answer my question, please, and I ask again...Whose the much greater fighter between Sam Langford and Samson Dutch Boy Gym?

I answered your question quite concisely, look above.

I am not going to critque the guys you mentioned above if your interested on them why dont you write an expose.

Michael Moore who had 9 defences of the WBO belt against much weaker opposition and not against any other title holders.

michael moore is one of the greatest lt heavyweight of all time because Emanuel Steward said so :D and he was, he ko everyone he face on lt heavyweight.

michael moore is one of the greatest lt heavyweight of all time because Emanuel Steward said so :D and he was, he ko everyone he face on lt heavyweight.

and that is a fact

Its not about win loss percentages. Its about title defences. If you make title defences your facing quality opposition. In that the very least your facing the mandatory #1 contenders on a consistant basis. You say having alot title defences means nothing. I think that is ridiculous.

In this day in age, title defenses are almost meaningless, since there are about a million belts going around. You think Bernard Hopkins fighting the #1 ranked IBF challenger, Sam Soliman, is more significant or impressive than fighting Felix Sturm or Winky Wright?

so who do you guys think was the better 175er?

DM or Qawi?

by the way the useful answers would come from ppl who saw both of them fighing

so who do you guys think was the better 175er?

DM or Qawi?

by the way the useful answers would come from ppl who saw both of them fighing

that leaves me out because i have never seen DM fight. But Qawi was very good.

id put bob foster over sam langford, id put more but sam had a long career and ive never seen him fight, if he wasnt any good id put gene tunny and conn over him as well

who do u thinks wins between holyfield vs. Foster? I'd take holy by ko

who do u thinks wins between holyfield vs. Foster? I'd take holy by ko


just because MM can beat holy doesnt mean foster cant beat moorer

just because MM can beat holy doesnt mean foster cant beat moorer

I think you missed my question. I asked who do you think wins between Foster and Holyfield. It has nothing to do with MM. Because i understand that styles make fights. But i have only seen foster fight once, and that was against Frazier. I assumed you have seen more fights of him, because you speak very high of foster. Thats why i ask you who wins between Foster and Holy.

I think you missed my question. I asked who do you think wins between Foster and Holyfield. It has nothing to do with MM. Because i understand that styles make fights. But i have only seen foster fight once, and that was against Frazier. I assumed you have seen more fights of him, because you speak very high of foster. Thats why i ask you who wins between Foster and Holy.

holy would win, foster isnt very good outside of his divsion, he has the best right hand ever at light heavy though, holy has to good of a chin for foster at cruiser or heavy :) not to mention right after losing to ali and fraizer by brutal KO's he came back in his next fight to regain his titles

shut up you take it in da butt

I started this thread a while back, after Watching Tarver, I'm wondering If Tarver could have beaten Moorer, what would have been great fight, Tarver has great skills,

Moorer is certainly better than any LHW Jones has faced.

I know I'm a Eubank nut-hugger, but deal with it. Eubank beat Moorer as an amateur at 156 in 1984, sorry guys I just had to get that in there.

Moorer is certainly better than any LHW Jones has faced.

I know I'm a Eubank nut-hugger, but deal with it. Eubank beat Moorer as an amateur at 156 in 1984, sorry guys I just had to get that in there.

do u think he would have beaten him as a PRO?

do u think he would have beaten him as a PRO?


No way. The size and strength differential is too great.

I also think that Moorer would have beaten Tarver, in similar fashion to the way he beat Stewart. Being somewhat outboxed and behind on the cards (I think that was the Stewart fight) and he comes back and KO's him.

Tarver has shown that he can be hurt and dropped and I think Moorer was too good a fighter at 175 to lose to a Tarver caliber fighter.

No way. The size and strength differential is too great.

I also think that Moorer would have beaten Tarver, in similar fashion to the way he beat Stewart. Being somewhat outboxed and behind on the cards (I think that was the Stewart fight) and he comes back and KO's him.

Tarver has shown that he can be hurt and dropped and I think Moorer was too good a fighter at 175 to lose to a Tarver caliber fighter.

I agree 100% & MM had a good chin at LHW too. Eubanks wasn't strong enough to keep MM off him. He'd eventually catch up to him.

The Jinx would have had his way with Moorer, like every other LH he faced.

do u think he would have beaten him as a PRO?
Eubank was actually fighting at LHW at the same time Moorer was the LHW WBO champ, he had a few fights at LHW before dropping back down to lighter weights, and you know around this time Eubank was always getting the better of Dennis Andries(WBC LHW champ at the time) in sparring sessions. Yes Eubank would of beat him as a pro, because Eubank always starved himself to stay below LHW, so if he wasn't starving himself he'd be even better than he was.

Eubank was actually fighting at LHW at the same time Moorer was the LHW WBO champ, he had a few fights at LHW before dropping back down to lighter weights, and you know around this time Eubank was always getting the better of Dennis Andries(WBC LHW champ at the time) in sparring sessions. Yes Eubank would of beat him as a pro, because Eubank always starved himself to stay below LHW, so if he wasn't starving himself he'd be even better than he was.

So you are telling me that Because he had an eating disorder he would be favored to beat MM who won every one of his LHW fights by KO.

So you are telling me that Because he had an eating disorder he would be favored to beat MM who won every one of his LHW fights by KO.
He didn't have an eating disorder dude, he had to make the weight. Eubank's chin is ridiculous so Moorer's no KOing him. As you know Dennis Andries and Moorer sparred a lot at the Kronk and it was so competitive that Manny knew they shouldn't fight the real deal in the arena because he feared one of them or both of them may of come out of it seriously hurt, and around the same time Eubank was easily beating Andries in sparring sessions when Andries was in London (whereas Moorer was getting beat up by Andries).

He didn't have an eating disorder dude, he had to make the weight. Eubank's chin is ridiculous so Moorer's no KOing him. As you know Dennis Andries and Moorer sparred a lot at the Kronk and it was so competitive that Manny knew they shouldn't fight the real deal in the arena because he feared one of them or both of them may of come out of it seriously hurt, and around the same time Eubank was easily beating Andries in sparring sessions when Andries was in London (whereas Moorer was getting beat up by Andries).

alright, I never knew this, It sounds like it could have been a pretty good fight though. Moorer was tough as nails, the guys that beat him where Hall of Famers Holy/foreman. by the time he fought Tua he was done, and Tua is one of the hardest hitters of all time so can't really take anything away from Moorer there. I'm sure Eubanks has a great chin, but so does Jirov, and alot of other HW's MM put down.

To be honest, nobody knows how good Eubank would of been at LHW. I think he would of been the **** though had he slipped to LHW after the Benn re-match(payday) and stayed there for five years.

http://www.exoticarmsusa.com/Photos/Do%20It%20Big%20-%20Roy%20Jones.jpg


ahahahaha

I cant breath

ahahahaa

I can't stand the guy anymore, seriously I can't even bare to watch any of Jones Jr's fights anymore. I just can't stand him.

MM is great but so were charles, tunney, roy jones, conn, foster,and moore.

i've always like RJJ but i don't think he would have been able to stand up with Moorer

Michael Moorer is to the light heavyweight division what Shane Mosley was to the lightweight division. Both devastated their opposition, but never faced an opponent that would solify their claim as a truly elite champion in the history of their division.

no one owns RJJ at any weight class in his prime. he was just too good.

i guess archie moore and ezzard charles never existed. :rolleyes:

just wondering how do you yall think Moorer would have done against Spinks, RJJ, Tarver?

The Jinx woulda' got him in trouble. Big Trouble.

MM has alot of comp to be called the best ;hw i mean theres, ezzard charles, archie moore, bob foster, billy conn, RJJ, and many many others, all are hard guys to beat

M. Moorer was the hardest puncher I've ever seen in the Light HW, also he had great speed for this weight & a good chin. In my opinion he was the best light HW I've ever seen.

He would've destroyed Jones or Tarver.

M. Moorer was the hardest puncher I've ever seen in the Light HW, also he had great speed for this weight & a good chin. In my opinion he was the best light HW I've ever seen.

He would've destroyed Jones or Tarver.

And Bhop, and Spinks

Was Michael Moorer the best Light-Heavyweigth ever?

Hmm...uhhh..No.

He wasn't even the best of the four titlists on top when he held that worthless WBO trinkett. He was good..devastating against the opposistion he fougtht; but Virgil Hill would have outboxed him. Prince Charles Williams could have beaten him, too; but Moorer probably would have knocked him out. Let's see. I think that leaves Denis Andres or Jeff Harding, if memory serves correctly...he could have beaten either of them.

Historically: Spinks beats him by decision and has him in trouble on occasion. Foster beats, maybe even kayos him. Moore stops him, IMO; but definetely beats him. ...and there are many others who would have too. Charles would have knocked him out. O'Brien would have danced circles around him. Tunney stops him.


No, he was not the best. He had an impressive knock-out streak over unimpressive opposistion at 175.

wasent roy jones undisputed champion in light heavyweight? he had all the three big title and some more
WBC Light Heavyweight Title
IBF Light Heavyweight Title
WBA Light Heavyweight Title
IBO Light Heavyweight Title
WBF Light Heavyweight Title
IBA Light Heavyweight Title
NBA Light Heavyweight Title
witch belts do you need to have to be considered undisputed champion?.
and i agree jones dominated much easier at 168
;)

This is what happens when you get your knowledge from boxrec, years after the fact, rather than from following and watching the sport.

Roy was never undisputed at 175.

Ever heard of Archie Moore?

WIth Moorer's size and power at 175, he had a chance against anyone, but would be a slight favorite against Dariusz and a slight underdog against Roy, IMHO. Those would have all been great fights because of Moorer's power and confidence in his power at 175.

WIth Moorer's size and power at 175, he had a chance against anyone, but would be a slight favorite against Dariusz and a slight underdog against Roy, IMHO. Those would have all been great fights because of Moorer's power and confidence in his power at 175.

And he had The roach

he would have pulverized michalewski......it would have been close with RJJ.

either way, he deserves a lot of credit for his achievements...

Good point, it's crazy how Moorer has never received any credit for what he has done. He beat Holy in his prime, never lost at LHW, won all fights by KO, the only guy to KO Jirov. beat foreman every round before the shot that was heard around the world

roy didnt have crazy power at 175

fact: michael moorer stopped every one of his opponents in the LHW division.

fact: he won the WBO title in 1988, held onto it for two years, with 9 successful defenses before vacating and moving up to HW.

fact: every fighter he fought at LHW was a bum.

its not hard to pad ur record with a KO streak of nobodies. and doing so should not merit you a p4p ranking or an all-time p4p slot.

fact: michael moorer stopped every one of his opponents in the LHW division.

fact: he won the WBO title in 1988, held onto it for two years, with 9 successful defenses before vacating and moving up to HW.

fact: every fighter he fought at LHW was a bum.

its not hard to pad ur record with a KO streak of nobodies. and doing so should not merit you a p4p ranking or an all-time p4p slot.

Not a P4P list, this is a LHW list. Who do you think at LHW could have beaten him? i like RJJ but i don't think he could have beaten him at LHW. or anyone else for that matter. Teddy Roach had Moorer at tip top shape.

Ever heard of Archie Moore?Or, Ezzard Charles, Bob Foster, Billy Conn, Michael Spinks...

When's he fighting next? Isn't he making another comeback?

he would have pulverized michalewski......it would have been close with RJJ.

either way, he deserves a lot of credit for his achievements...

now he is talking about returning, i think its a bad idea, not too many guys will stand in front of him lik eJirov did

michael moorer had one weakness at 175 , he just hated to box . he stated it himself numbers of time . i really think jones (a prime jones ) would have taken a decision just by out boxing him , because after a few rounds moorer would be like "who cares , i am getting paid anyway" .

i think he would of killed rjj, roy couldnt even deal with tarver becuase he was a tall southpaw, moorer had great cordination and can hit with both hands. i could see anybody beating him at lightheavy except archie moore.... ezzard chalres, spinks and foster have a shot. roy at 168 in his prime no one would of ever beat him he was too athletic for anybody on this planet

i think he would of killed rjj, roy couldnt even deal with tarver becuase he was a tall southpaw, moorer had great cordination and can hit with both hands. i could see anybody beating him at lightheavy except archie moore.... ezzard chalres, spinks and foster have a shot. roy at 168 in his prime no one would of ever beat him he was too athletic for anybody on this planet

What a load of bologne.

alot of guys just from within the last ten years would have a very good chance against him, knowing now that he had a major weakness in the chin department.

A guy like McClellan who knocked like everybody out in the first round, and walked through everybodies punches like they were nothing would have exposed him early in his career.

no im dead seriousi think he was on steroids but , i think he was unbeatable at 168. its new division if toney was in great shape he could of beat him but none of the brits stand a chance

no im dead seriousi think he was on steroids but , i think he was unbeatable at 168. its new division if toney was in great shape he could of beat him but none of the brits stand a chance

Calzaghe would

I dont think Toney ever beats Jones though, Jones' style and strengths are just all wrong for him.

thats why that fight has to happen rjj vs calzaghe. they both need that fight right now

thats why that fight has to happen rjj vs calzaghe. they both need that fight right nowJones is washed up!

just wondering how do you yall think Moorer would have done against Spinks, RJJ, Tarver? Moorer had 22 fights in the LightHW DIV winning all by KO. 10 title defenses all by KO. Could he be the best LightHW of all times? if not Why. I don't think anyone at that weight class could hurt him, but we all know the kind of power moorer has. To bad he was overshadowed by mike tyson. In 1988 moorer fought and won 13 fights by KO including a world title.
hard to say but he was one bad mofo at that weight. was the hardest puncher ever in that weight class in my opinion. the greatest is arguable though. didnt stay there long enough