Should Archie Moore rank higher than Duran?

[Manassa]

Duran was, of course, amazing. But in that category he's out done by Moore.

You can argue Duran's placement above; but it will be on peak ability.

Moore had the shit beaten out of him by Booker, Chase, Charles and was knocked out by Morrow. By 1948 after an already grueling career, having mixed it up multiple times with the entire Murderer's Row and anyone else who wanted to be part of it, at age thirty two, who would have expected Moore to go on a 54-2-1 streak, win the light heavyweight title and express superiority over such a quality contemporary as Harold Johnson?

Then he was knocked out by Marciano, Patterson and Ali. Although actually, if we excuse Moore for being shopworn and in his forties, apart from those younger, Hall of Fame heavyweights, Moore only lost once from 1956 until his retirement, going 40-1 and avenging that loss. During that time he was still beating rated heavyweights in between draining himself to defend his light heavyweight crown.

Shit, even in his late forties Moore held a prime Willie Pastrano to a draw.

[Stonehands89]

Originally Posted by Manassa

Ah, no, I meant Duran's ability to squat up and down while skipping rope. A sure sign of his agility and overall physical prowess.

On punching, I think his body work was truly elite. Maybe the best I've seen for precision.

To be better than Robinson at skipping rope, that's outlandish.

Body punching, yes. For me it was how easily he combined offense with defense after laying a trap. Simultaneous offense/defense is high level stuff. Duran did it seamlessly.

And of course I love his little tricks -the Fitzsimmons shift, and Brown's thumb prints (like how he'd miss a left hook, step right, and then pivot into a right cross). Add his being a bad-ass (one of the best in boxing this side of LaMotta). When he was forced back into the ropes by Barkley and then sprang off of them with a 4 punch-combination -that stuff stays with you.

[Stonehands89]

Originally Posted by Manassa

Duran was, of course, amazing. But in that category he's out done by Moore.

You can argue Duran's placement above; but it will be on peak ability.

Moore had the shit beaten out of him by Booker, Chase, Charles and was knocked out by Morrow. By 1948 after an already grueling career, having mixed it up multiple times with the entire Murderer's Row and anyone else who wanted to be part of it, at age thirty two, who would have expected Moore to go on a 54-2-1 streak, win the light heavyweight title and express superiority over such a quality contemporary as Harold Johnson?

Then he was knocked out by Marciano, Patterson and Ali. Although actually, if we excuse Moore for being shopworn and in his forties, apart from those younger, Hall of Fame heavyweights, Moore only lost once from 1956 until his retirement, going 40-1 and avenging that loss. During that time he was still beating rated heavyweights in between draining himself to defend his light heavyweight crown.

Shit, even in his late forties Moore held a prime Willie Pastrano to a draw.

Good post made better by the views by many that Moore should have gotten the duke over Pastrano! Moore did the chasing and the punching, Pastrano did the holding. A consensus of boxing writers polled at ringside believed it. The AP had it 8-2 Moore

[Manassa]

Originally Posted by Stonehands89

Good post made better by the views by many that Moore should have gotten the duke over Pastrano! Moore did the chasing and the punching, Pastrano did the holding. A consensus of boxing writers polled at ringside believed it. The AP had it 8-2 Moore

Yep. Moore's later title defences were nothing to write home about, but he is excused for:

a) Defending against Johnson and Maxim previously
b) Having to drain himself every time
c) Being old
d) Drawing with (and like you said, beating) Pastrano as late as 1962