Moorer vs Holyfield what it tells us

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I think billeau2 has a valid point with this thread, especially when it comes to the excuse making of Holyfield's losses. Yes he outclassed Evander in the first fight and deserved to be crowned the winner.

But in the rematch Holyfield put in some of the most beautiful combinations I've seen a heavyweight put together. He in turn had an incredible performance as well.

What is the point of the thread...

To try and analyze evander's career using fights like toney, donald, byrd, is just beyond ******ed...
Why doesnt he use fights from holyfields prime...
Do you see me using moorer's fight vs tua or jirov..

Fights that should be used to assess holyfield would be the cruiser wars, dokes, holmes, cooper, bowe, douglas, foreman, etc... not toney, byrd, donald, ibrigov...


Im fine with criticizing holyfield, but at least use relevant fights instead of when he was past prime...

[Scott9945]

Moorer is in the discussion for best light heavyweight of all time. He for sure befuddled Evander, although wasn't their first fight the one where he claimed heart problems?

Michael Moorer never even beat a top 20 light heavyweight. He shouldn't be in any discussion like that at all. His 175 lb dominance is another boxing myth. Bob Foster or Michael Spinks would have obliterated Moorer and his glass jaw.

[BKM-2010]

What is the point of the thread...

To try and analyze evander's career using fights like toney, donald, byrd, is just beyond ******ed...
Why doesnt he use fights from holyfields prime...
Do you see me using moorer's fight vs tua or jirov..

Fights that should be used to assess holyfield would be the cruiser wars, dokes, holmes, cooper, bowe, douglas, foreman, etc... not toney, byrd, donald, ibrigov...


Im fine with criticizing holyfield, but at least use relevant fights instead of when he was past prime...

I guess he went a little off with his point there. I still do agree with him that Moorer's win over Holyfield gets discredited. The same people that do that often times fail to acknowledge that Moorer wasn't at his best in the rematch, so it's good to point out the unfairness.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I guess he went a little off with his point there. I still do agree with him that Moorer's win over Holyfield gets discredited. The same people that do that often times fail to acknowledge that Moorer wasn't at his best in the rematch, so it's good to point out the unfairness.

Yeah, i agree that it gets discredited in some cirlces, but it was the beginning of the end for holyfield at his peak..

There is a huge difference between holyfield that lost to bowe in 92, and the one that lost to moorer in 94

Kinda like when ray robinson lost to inferior guys at MW,, it wasnt the best version of ray..

[Elroy1]

Holyfield was great....

The fights you are referencing are of an old shot holyfield... Holyfield 88-93 was very capable of handling guys like moorer, byrd, ibragiov...

the wars at cruiser, dokes, bowe, foreman, alex stewart, bert cooper caused holyfield to age quickly... By 94-99 he was still a good fighter, but nothing like he was earlier..

And he destroyed moorer in the rematch

using fights post 2000 is not very fair way to assess holyfield...

I actually agree it is unfair to penalise Holyfield too badly for his post 2000 performances. He was shop worn then.

Except I baulk when ppl try to claim he was done by 93. He was in fine form against Tyson and Lennox.

Although I feel Ibragimov and Byrd would always have been difficult opponents for Holy, it's obvious he was past it here.

[Elroy1]

Michael Moorer never even beat a top 20 light heavyweight. He shouldn't be in any discussion like that at all. His 175 lb dominance is another boxing myth. Bob Foster or Michael Spinks would have obliterated Moorer and his glass jaw.

Moorer was good at LHW. And powerful. He was just a featherfist and chinny as a HW.

He would have killed Foster and most likely beaten Spinks.

He was giving Foreman a complete hiding until he paid the price for standing in front of the big fella (assuming of course that was not fixed, that whole scenario seemed very theatrical to me tbh).

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I actually agree it is unfair to penalise Holyfield too badly for his post 2000 performances. He was shop worn then.

Except I baulk when ppl try to claim he was done by 93. He was in fine form against Tyson and Lennox.

Although I feel Ibragimov and Byrd would always have been difficult opponents for Holy, it's obvious he was past it here.

Holyfield was past prime 94-99,, he was still capable but nothing like he was in 90,91...

holyfield 94-99 is similar to shane from 03-09, chavez 91-97, still capable but def not the same caliber of fighter

94-99 was holy's steroid era

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Moorer was good at LHW. And powerful. He was just a featherfist and chinny as a HW.

He would have killed Foster and most likely beaten Spinks.

He was giving Foreman a complete hiding until he paid the price for standing in front of the big fella (assuming of course that was not fixed, that whole scenario seemed very theatrical to me tbh).

Moorer never beat anyone of note at lhw,,,, Its crazy to say he is some great lhw... he never faced any type of competition there

[TBear]

On Moorer-Holy I; Moorer won that fight with the jab. Which was the right jab, bring a southpaw. Something Holyfield had little experience with since the amateurs. Secondly if you watch Moorer's previous fights at heavyweight he brawled. So how could Holyfield expect anything different. Yes Holyfield and his corner should have made the adjustments, but they definitely came in with a bad plan. On the other hand Moorer's team did the opposite.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

On Moorer-Holy I; Moorer won that fight with the jab. Which was the right jab, bring a southpaw. Something Holyfield had little experience with since the amateurs. Secondly if you watch Moorer's previous fights at heavyweight he brawled. So how could Holyfield expect anything different. Yes Holyfield and his corner should have made the adjustments, but they definitely came in with a bad plan. On the other hand Moorer's team did the opposite.

Good points.. That jab was the difference in that fight,,, Holyfield took moorer lightly has moorer had yet to get any real signature wins at the top level, and like you said, brawled alot and totally caught holy off guard with the jab and style... Great gameplan by moorers camp, and horrible preparation by holy's team