Archie Moore's heavyweight record versus Jack Dempsey's

Worth a comparison I think.

People use Dempsey's 'name' opponents so I'll do the same for Moore, as in boxers who were at some point top ten rated by RING (going by Boxrec Encyclopaedia's annual ratings for Moore - largely unavailable for Dempsey):

Dempsey:

Jack Sharkey
Georges Carpentier
Bill Brennan x2
Luis Firpo
Tommy Gibbons
Gunboat Smith x2
Billy Miske x2
Jess Willard
Carl Morris x3
Fred Fulton
Battling Levinsky
Porky Dan Flynn x2
Willie Meehan
Fireman Jim Flynn

Moore:

Nino Valdes x2
Bob Baker
Bob Dunlop x2
Clarence Henry
Charley Norkus
Jimmy Slade
Jimmy Bivins x4
Rusty Payne
Phil Muscato
Curtis Sheppard x2
Buddy Walker
Joey Maxim x3
Bob Satterfield
Alejandro Lavorante

That's what I could gather anyway.

I think a couple of names on Dempsey's are very questionable. Moore's are slightly less questionable, and the big, crap heavyweights he beat (Embrel Davidson, 20-2-0, Hans Kalpfell, 16-1, James Parker, 29-5-4, Bob Albright, 21-7-3 etc., none of whom are on the above list) are worth more than Dempsey's barnstormers in my opinion.

I feel Dempsey's record scrapes the barrel a bit more; with Moore you could stretch yourself to including good journeymen and other decent-if-padded boxers like Bert Whitehurst, Alberto Lovell and Abel Cestac - if you wanted to. To be fair, if we're including someone as small as Carpentier it's tempting to mention Harold Johnson but then we're venturing into light heavyweight territory (Maxim was regularly rated at heavyweight).

Aside from those who were rated, there are at least another fifteen, probably more, heavyweights on Moore's record with Flynn-like records although that doesn't automatically put them on the same level.

Perhaps Dempsey won more emphatically but to be fair Moore did knock out plenty of them.

This was less about putting down Dempsey ("yeah, right" they say) and more about Moore's greatness.

Thoughts?

 

:d

 

Thanks.

This is why I rate Moore so highly (#10 pound-for-pound, no lower, and that is final). He was an excellent heavyweight with the scalps to prove like you said, and to his credit, the only people to really beat him there were Marciano, Ali and Patterson when he was old.

Moore, mid forties or older against a 210lbs contender: "Lavorante was carried from the ring on a stretcher."



They like to say Bernard Hopkins is a modern day Moore but really, with respect to Hopkins, he isn't even close.

****, at one point Moore, in consecutive fights, weighed:

175lbs
190lbs
190lbs
173lbs
196lbs
175lbs
188lbs

That is hard work, and not the only string of examples.

Oops, need to edit, missed another rated heavyweight, Norkus

I'm laughing because even to a massive fan like myself, Moore has me in awe at every analysis.

 

Look, if I can kill two birds with one stone... :yep

 

It's the stuff of legends. His punching is beautiful.

Get this: Moore fought in Italy, Canada, Brazil, Germany, England, Argentina, Uruguay, Panama and Australia and beat their best in between boxing in the USA.

Started career as a welterweight too remember.

Sorry, I'm really selling this aren't I?

 

Personally I think they're even.

 

No I don't actually, Moore's has more depth at the C level.

 

Sharkey is the best between them I think.

Moore didn't shock anyone as significant as Fulton in one round, but I definitely think he had wins to rival it. TKO9 Bivins in 1947? Moore did of course flatten a few heavyweights early, even if they weren't quite Fulton. KO1 Davidson, KO1 Lovell, KO1 Dunlop, KO1 King (journeyman).