BoxRec

Moorer stopped the tough as nails Jirov late when he was a shell of himself. He's in a different league than Sanders and he'd treat him like it.

And I'd take a motivated and trained Cooper to knock out Sanders late as well.

I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holy could crack. Just ask Bowe. Corrie's no Holyfield.

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.

Well clearly he wasn't, but surely if he could beat Wlad in a shoot-out he could beat Moorer. I'm very surprised Michael has such a fan base here. He was never exactly a very dynamic heavyweight.

polecateddy wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.

Well clearly he wasn't, but surely if he could beat Wlad in a shoot-out he could beat Moorer. I'm very surprised Michael has such a fan base here. He was never exactly a very dynamic heavyweight.

Sanders/Wlad wasn't much of a shoot-out. Sanders had him down rather quickly and never let up. Wlad obviously has become more responsible since.

Rover wrote:

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holy could crack. Just ask Bowe. Corrie's no Holyfield.

And yes Holyfield and Moorer were 'medium punchers.' Whereas your Lennox Lewis, Corrie Sanders and David Tua's' are BIG punchers. There's logic on display here. You need to be able to keep up!

Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.[/quote]

Well clearly he wasn't, but surely if he could beat Wlad in a shoot-out he could beat Moorer. I'm very surprised Michael has such a fan base here. He was never exactly a very dynamic heavyweight.[/quote]
Sanders/Wlad wasn't much of a shoot-out. Sanders had him down rather quickly and never let up. Wlad obviously has become more responsible since.[/quote]

So Rover you'd really bet your house on Moorer not ending up planko against Corrie Sanders. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to take that bet! Lol

polecateddy wrote:

Rover wrote:

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holy could crack. Just ask Bowe. Corrie's no Holyfield.

And yes Holyfield and Moorer were 'medium punchers.' Whereas your Lennox Lewis, Corrie Sanders and David Tua's' are BIG punchers. There's logic on display here. You need to be able to keep up!

As has been pointed out, Holy was not a medium puncher.
Neither was Moorer.

polecateddy wrote:Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.

Well clearly he wasn't, but surely if he could beat Wlad in a shoot-out he could beat Moorer. I'm very surprised Michael has such a fan base here. He was never exactly a very dynamic heavyweight.[/quote]
Sanders/Wlad wasn't much of a shoot-out. Sanders had him down rather quickly and never let up. Wlad obviously has become more responsible since.[/quote]

So Rover you'd really bet your house on Moorer not ending up planko against Corrie Sanders. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to take that bet! Lol[/quote]
When did I say that? I don't gamble. I'd pick Moorer.

By what yardstick can you suggest that either Moorer or Holyfield was as dynamic a puncher as Sanders? It's blatantly wrong, and just simply argumentative to suggest it. It is common knowledge to any knowledgable boxing fan that Moorer was only ever a big puncher when he was a light heavyweight.

polecateddy wrote:By what yardstick can you suggest that either Moorer or Holyfield was as dynamic a puncher as Sanders? It's blatantly wrong, and just simply argumentative to suggest it. It is common knowledge to any knowledgable boxing fan that Moorer was only ever a big puncher when he was a light heavyweight.

Tell that to Cooper and Stewart.
If I (and others who agree with me) are being "argumaetative," then so are you.

Rover wrote:

polecateddy wrote:By what yardstick can you suggest that either Moorer or Holyfield was as dynamic a puncher as Sanders? It's blatantly wrong, and just simply argumentative to suggest it. It is common knowledge to any knowledgable boxing fan that Moorer was only ever a big puncher when he was a light heavyweight.

Tell that to Cooper and Stewart.
If I (and others who agree with me) are being "argumaetative," then so are you.

:) So just to clarify, you are saying heavyweight Michael Moorer was as big a puncher as Corrie Sanders? Okay then! Lol

I've said Moorer and Holyfield aren't "medium punchers," as have others here. They both have plenty of power to take out Sanders, especially after a few rounds when he begins to fade.

Rover wrote:I've said Moorer and Holyfield aren't "medium punchers," as have others here. They both have plenty of power to take out Sanders, especially after a few rounds when he begins to fade.

No go on, say it. Holyfield and Moorer were big punchers like Lewis, Tua and Sanders. Or do you have a special rating system, where the latter fighters are super-duper big punchers, and Mooorer is only a big puncher? You know like the WBC belt system or something! :)

polecateddy wrote:

Rover wrote:I've said Moorer and Holyfield aren't "medium punchers," as have others here. They both have plenty of power to take out Sanders, especially after a few rounds when he begins to fade.

No go on, say it. Holyfield and Moorer were big punchers like Lewis, Tua and Sanders. Or do you have a special rating system, where the latter fighters are super-duper big punchers, and Mooorer is only a big puncher? You know like the WBC belt system or something! :)

Who was a bigger puncher, Tua or Sanders?
You're not getting this. If Moorer and Holyfield hit hard enough to stop Sanders (which they do), arguing that Sanders hits harder doesn't change the first point.
So, bigger puncher, Tua or Sanders.

Rover wrote:

polecateddy wrote:

Rover wrote:I've said Moorer and Holyfield aren't "medium punchers," as have others here. They both have plenty of power to take out Sanders, especially after a few rounds when he begins to fade.

No go on, say it. Holyfield and Moorer were big punchers like Lewis, Tua and Sanders. Or do you have a special rating system, where the latter fighters are super-duper big punchers, and Mooorer is only a big puncher? You know like the WBC belt system or something! :)

Who was a bigger puncher, Tua or Sanders?
You're not getting this. If Moorer and Holyfield hit hard enough to stop Sanders (which they do), arguing that Sanders hits harder doesn't change the first point.
So, bigger puncher, Tua or Sanders.

I'd say Tua, but it's more complicated as Sanders had reach and long range punches Tua wouldn't be able to pull off. And yes Rover, you can be a medium puncher like Moorer and Holyfield and stop Sanders if he got tired.

Bigger puncher, Sanders or Lewis.
And I don't think he was tired against Tubbs. He also got dropped early against Rahman (same round he dropped Rahman, in fact).
He didn't have a great chin.
And Tua's power and ability to deliver punches are two different things.

Rover wrote:Bigger puncher, Sanders or Lewis.
And I don't think he was tired against Tubbs. He also got dropped early against Rahman (same round he dropped Rahman, in fact).
He didn't have a great chin.
And Tua's power and ability to deliver punches are two different things.

Got to be Lewis of course. Look if Sanders during his career could have picked a champion to fight my money is he would have picked Moorer. Not saying he definitely would have won, but it would have been a better bet than Holyfield, Lewis, etc.

polecateddy wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.

Well clearly he wasn't, but surely if he could beat Wlad in a shoot-out he could beat Moorer. I'm very surprised Michael has such a fan base here. He was never exactly a very dynamic heavyweight.

He was better than Wlad.

polecateddy wrote:

Rover wrote:

polecateddy wrote:I'm really not a troll, but thanks for that. What about Moorer is Holyfield 2, how confident are you guys that that version of Moorer could navigate the early rounds against Sanders? Moorer was was floored multiple times by a medium puncher and stopped.

Holy could crack. Just ask Bowe. Corrie's no Holyfield.

And yes Holyfield and Moorer were 'medium punchers.' Whereas your Lennox Lewis, Corrie Sanders and David Tua's' are BIG punchers. There's logic on display here. You need to be able to keep up!

Holyfield was more dangerous than any of the guys you mentioned here with the exception of Lewis. He was a precision puncher the likes of which Sanders could only dream of being and this enabled to dump guys like Qawi,Bowe, Mercer & Tyson with single punches. Many have duplicated Corrie's claim to fame.

Seriously, you mention logic and every day there is another old wives tale involving the fat golfer?

Holyfield was much more than a medium puncher, he fought the best of the best and hurt many of them. I'm very confident that Moorer would beat Sanders, 90%. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, Corrie wasn't at the level you envision him at.[/quote]

Well clearly he wasn't, but surely if he could beat Wlad in a shoot-out he could beat Moorer. I'm very surprised Michael has such a fan base here. He was never exactly a very dynamic heavyweight.[/quote]

He was better than Wlad.[/quote]

Michael Moorer was better than Wlad Klitschko? Are you off your nut?

I didn't stutter.

And yes Holyfield and Moorer were 'medium punchers.' Whereas your Lennox Lewis, Corrie Sanders and David Tua's' are BIG punchers. There's logic on display here. You need to be able to keep up![/quote]

Holyfield was more dangerous than any of the guys you mentioned here with the exception of Lewis. He was a precision puncher the likes of which Sanders could only dream of being and this enabled to dump guys like Qawi,Bowe, Mercer & Tyson with single punches. Many have duplicated Corrie's claim to fame.

Seriously, you mention logic and every day there is another old wives tale involving the fat golfer?[/quote]

A fat golfer? Fairly disrespectful! I'm sorry but Holyfield was a decent medium puncher with a good left hook. What's wrong with being a medium puncher? I'm sorry but no serious boxing pundit rates either Holyfield or Moorer as a big puncher. This is a fact!

Holyfield is more likely to stop a good fighter than Corrie Sanders is, by a significant margin. That isn't hypothetical, it's factual. I'm really not concerned with your level of power. One guy is an underrated puncher and the other is overrated, their skill levels aren't in the same universe so it's really irrelevant.

Yes, Corrie was a fat golfer who has somehow morphed into a murderous devastation machine in this forum because he iced a fighter that many others would too.

And if you want to toss around insults about intellect, try and master the art of quoting that a 3 year old would get in a few seconds.