Archie Moore versus Wladimir Klitschko's opposition

I think Moore comfortably beats them all apart from Byrd , haye and Thompson

I think he probably beats the three mentioned also with haye the most likely to beat him

But I'd go with Moore to beat them all

 

I don´t think Moore would have the same level of consistency to beat them all in sequence.....
Guys like Byrd, Peter and Haye would be tough to Moore´s heavyweight version....

 

Moore vs ibragimov wold have been interesting. For some reason Sultan intrigues me more than Wlad's other opponents.

 

Nice post, and important to factor in.

I thought Moore was lighter than 200lbs though at his heavyweight best, you learn summat knew every day (need to lay off the reefer ;-))

 

Haye would beat Moore, Brewster might knock Moore out, at least the 1st version Wlad faced. Chambers has speed and size on Moore with good skills of his own. Calvin Brock is an unknown quality, he could of been a decent contender I feel. Ibragimov and Chagaev are challenges for Moore

Moore was never 200-207lbs was he? More like 190 tops

 

Moore would lose 2 or 3 times if he fought all those guys in sequence. He might have a couple of very close tough fights among the wins too.

 

Is he fighting them all in a year or is he keeping with Wlads schedule?

I think he should beat them all, but Moore was never the most consistent, Id have money on Moore in every fight

 

I think Haye beats him. But it wouldn't exactly be an upset if Moore won.

The point about consistency is true though. Individually people might expect Moore to win every fight but would he emerge a gauntlet undefeated?

 

Moore was very consistent.
His main problem here is he's fighting too many far bigger men.

 

What diffference does it make that they were bigger? They had no skills. None.
Haye beat Valeuv giving up a 100 pounds.
The only two guys that would trouble Moore are Haye and Sultan.

Deluded people who think Wlad is a great, take a look at his fight with Peters. Knocked down 3 times and had to run for his life to survive. He couldn't even score 0ne knock down.

Now take a look at an authentic ATG- past his best Middleweight James Toney. Boxed Peters to bits to a SD and got robbed by the judges. He achieved that battleing weight problems and with none of the size , strenght, youth and power that Wlad had.

 

I agree that size isn't the be all and end all but at some point it does begin to factor otherwise guys like Floyd would just fight anyone below cruiser.

I dont think in this case size is particularly an issue. Moore was a proven entity at hw. I dont see his chin holding up against haye but the converse could easily be said.

Moore beat Valdes and that's a quality of opponent easily on par with any of these listed imo.

I did think chag was gonna be great but it didnt happen.

I think wlad is great because of what he's achieved, not necessarily because of who he's beaten.

 

Nah, I really cant see Haye winning. Hes probably one of the easier ones.

 

When I think of what Patterson did to Moore I just can't find myself favouring him over Haye.

 

I referring just to HW boxing. In the lower divisions , size does factor.

Beating quality opponents is more of an achievement than holding the belts hostage fighting bums.

Mayweather could easily of fought 3 bottom feeders last year. Lets say he started of fighting retired Luis Collazo, then finished up with Paul Maclosky and Carson Jones.
Is he great for doing that? Of course not.