I agree with you klompton,..I think it was Rocky's best performace...his style had evolved to this...a patient, more methodical, "wear 'em down" type style...he was relentless.
Archie was a great heavyweight contender who held the LH title. Until Sadd Muhammad came along every LH champ was also a heavyweight because they all fought and beat heavyweights. They fought them beat them and joined them. The LH title was practically a springboard within the HW division for the ones that could make 175lb .
I don't think Moore was a great heavyweight. Show me one respected list that has him on its ATG top 20?
Foster did not have the physique to deal successfully with the top heavyweights. That in no way detracts from his standing as a great lightheavy, it's just how it was.
Layne was systematically broken down before he was ko'd he was not in top shape and he never had the defence to cope with Marciano's shots. I believe Walcott could have gotten up. Marciano's other top stoppage wins were the result of a systematic grinding and battering . A year after being worn down by Marciano, Moore was taken out with one left hook by Patterson.
Top 20 ATG is going a bit strong. With all the history we have had there proberbly is not room in top 20 heavyweight champions for Archie and why should there be? Archie was a HW contender not a HW champion. But Moore was an outstanding heavyweight contender in his own right from about 1952-1958. He even beat rated heavyweights in 1962 as well. As far as HW contenders go Archie was a great one. Eddie Machen won't make top 20 ATG heavyweight status either but Eddie was an outstanding heavyweight ATG contender.
That's your opinion, I don't see Moore as a great heavyweight .We obviously have different ideas about what constitutes great.