1954 Charles v.s. Moore ...

When Corbett fought Jeffries in 1900, he had not won a fight in SIX years(and that was against a man weighing 160lb). I think that would make Corbett officially more faded when he fought Jeffries. Yet you seem to think otherwise.

 

The Charles of June 17th 1954 beats Archie Moore by Unanimous Decision. Any other version probably loses.

"No other fighter in the world could have survived those 15 rounds with Charles last night, let alone with the decision."- Boxing and Wrestling June 18th 1954.

 

too mean

 

Suzie just never stops.

 

This content is protected

 

HE,

Just do us all a favor and take your lack of knowledge back to CyberBoxing. I am sure those wise historians have the patience to be able to put up with you.

 

No wife pictures whatever you do

 

Out of all posters to transfer from Cyberboxing..we get the very worst one. atsch What bad luck.

 

Charles does enough to warrant a SD over Moore.

 

Not sure how much Charles had declined (but he had) how far he was from peak in the time of the trilogy, also how much had Moore improved and changed since their trilogy? Had he declined himself from his peak? He'd be what 37?

 

Charles declined significantly.

He was in his prime when he was fighting Moore.

Ezz's prime ended somewhere about 1948-1949.

Some say Baroudi fight was the watershed fight for Charles.

He became old (but still dangerous) fighter after Walcott 3 loosing by KO.


Personally I've never bought talks about Moore priming after 30.

He looks very skillful and quicker in his earlier available fights.

In my opinion his record improved after because his opposition gotten softer - no more Burley, Charles, Booker etc - that was some brutal schedule.

And his great longevity, skills, lesser dependance on physical attributes helped him fighting on high level at much older age.