Archie Moore

A pithy aside to be sure, but it always stuck in my craw a bit when boxing experts pick him as the best (or near the best) puncher in history. His KO record speaks more to the sheer amount of fights he had, and his boxing ingenuity than power.

This of course assumes those making lists of "greatest puncher" are qualifying the list in terms of the power of their punches.

 

He was one of the best punchers in history. To score the amount of KO's against the opposition fought is astonishing.

Obviously films indicates that he was a great puncher as well.

 

A great great fighter. One of the last great fighters who learned his craft in boxing's golden age and heyday.
Along with Robinson, Pep, Charles etc.

 

Quite clearly he was one of the best.

 

His longevity is excellent, his ability at his best isn't quite so much and he's not near top10 of all time P4P in that respect

 

Depends how one rates punchers, I suppose. I still say the results of his fights are due more to his savvy, intelligence, and technique than any raw power.

Does that make him a non-great puncher? Of course not, but again I think it boils down to how you define it. I don't think he was as powerful a puncher as is implied by the ranking.

 

I wouldn't say that the greatness of a puncher is based on how hard he hit. Joe Louis was a better puncher than Earnie Shavers or even George Foreman. Thomas Hearns was a better puncher than Julian Jackson or Gerald McClellan.

Moore flattened people from middleweight up to heavyweight so obviously he could hit fairly hard too.

 

I would agree with that.

 

Unfortunately I hate to agree. I would change the word respect to regard, though. I think he can merit such placement on a longevity and achievement based criteria. However, when naming 10 of the best P4P fighters at their best, It would seem wrong to include Archie Moore.

 

I would say Moore definitely had sheer power.

The reason he was so successful is because he complimented it with all of his other attributes. There are plenty of punchers with beautiful punching form who aren't devastating hitters.

Moore is definitely one of the greatest punchers in history. On those lists, it's technique and power for me, but by technique I don't necessarily mean aesthetically pleasing.

Moore was that also. Brilliant fighter, and I would also agree he's in that tier just below the 'Aliens'.

I have him anywhere between 10-13 on most days. I feel pretty happy with Barney Ross in the no.10 spot nowadays, but the couple of guys that follow him could feasibly swap places with him and vice versa and it would take no effort to justify it.

EDIT: On Moore's placing, my criteria is 'look at ****ing everything'. Certain fighters had freakish achievements (or kudos points as I refer 'em to, because that's all it is, 'who deserves more respect than the other') and Moore's longevity, and opposition faced, as well as long-reign, successes, and the K.O record, are all mad things that lead him to being an insanely regarded fighter.

Exactly why Foreman is in my top 5 Heavyweights but not in a lot of other peoples. Do I really give a **** he was soundly beaten by Tommy Morrison? No, because he has a crazy achievement no other fighter has, and added to other aspects of his work, it adds up to a special fighter IMO. He's also in my top ten punchers because, he was no Joe Louis, but he had freakishly damaging hands. That kinda' power is just as scary to me as a Julian Jackson lights out type of guy.

Moore has a load of quality wins anyway.

Manassa, Eddie Booker? Where do you rank him?

 

Moore was a great puncher. Sure, his savviness helped. The Napoles comparison isn't bad, it's just Moore was a better puncher than him.

 

I don't see how you can possibly question his ability. His ability at his best is certainly near top 10 p4p of all time.