Who's greater Archie Moore or Ray Robinson and why?

Archie's three losses to Charles and one sided pounding by a prime Burley aren't duplicated anywhere in Robinsons long career. By themselves they display a difference in how they fared against comparable greats in their weight classes and how they might rank on ATG pound for pound lists.

 

Moore was the harder puncher.

 

Moore was a great finisher and because he was a light-heavy and small heavyweight he should have punched harder then the welter-middleweight Robinson. Looking at one punch ko's Ray scored over Olson, Graziano, Fulmer, etc., I don't think comparably Archie hit as hard.

 

Bored are we today?How many threads are you going to start tomorrow?

 

Moore was not a harder puncher than Robinson in my opinion, not in terms of pure power anyway. He was just crafty and a better trap setter in my opinion.

Robinson greater, though Moore's development as he moved up in weight plus his longevity are incredible.

Also, to those saying 'Robinson didn't lose to Burley' or whatnot he never faced him either. Robinson was a former lightweight who tried to win the light heavyweight title. Moore a middleweight who ended up at heavy. In terms of weight scaled, it's pretty similar in my opinion.

Welterweight, middleweight and light heavyweight are all stacked divisions historically. For me, Robinson is the #1 welter and the #2 middleweight. Moore the #2 light heavyweight. So I'm definitely going with Robinson as the greater fighter.

 

Archie Moore was my boxing hero. But I would not quite put him in the same level as SRR who was, in my opinion, the best ever.

 

Gainer did ask at one point for someone other then Burley for Ray as he thought his style would give Robinson some real problems but that doesn't mean he would have dropped Sugar four times like he did Archie. Ezzard who owned Moore with the 3-0 also won a clear dec. over Burley as did Holman Williams on several occasions (Charley returned the favor).

 

I'm not sure Burley and Robinson were ever rated at the same time in the same division.

 

Even though Archie Moore was an all-time great, Sugar Ray Robinson was a far greater fighter. For close to two decades, Robinson was the best welterweight or middleweight for much of the time. Moore was the best light-heavyweight for close to a decade, but wasn't the best at his weight at any time during during the first fourteen years of his career. That changed for Moore after Ezzard Charles won the vacant National Boxing Association version of the world heavyweight title in a bout with Jersey Joe Walcott during 1949.

- Chuck Johnston

 

Interesting. I always thought of Young SRR as a lightweight. I think that February 1942 was the only mouth it could happen; Ray first moved up (the majority of his previous fights took place in the 135-140 lb range) late '41, early '42 and Burley hadn't been fighting many welterweights.

Anyway it's obvious from this that Ray ducked him.

 

I don't think Ray ducked him by the way.

 

Robinson was more consistant and dominant, he gets my vote.:good

 

There was never a fighter in modern times [from the 1930s and til today] that
compared to Ray Robinson in greatness or all around ability, certainly better P4P greater
than Archie Moore who though tremendous as a lightheavyweight, was never as
good as Ezzard Charles....We are of course talking about respective weights...
I who was lucky to see SRR in his WW prime a few times ringside ,was stunned along with the crowd seeing the immortal Ray Robinson...Having said this if Willie Pep
could hit harder than he did, I would place him over Robinson, but alas "if" doesn't
count in boxing...

 

I hope it's healthy.... and thank you for taking the time to look it up.