What were Archie Moores weaknesses?

yes thats a weakness for sure , Not him using his application was good but not perfect(hes not a bad fighter)

in this fight you see him take 10 shots to counter with 1 etc. Thats not gonna work , what hes doing with that high guard is what a boxer with a high guard does when cornered ,just shell up and hope they leave you a lone ,(only in close did archie do this he used the guard well from further out)

uppercuts also do well against archie since he would lean with that guard at times

at 2236 rocky rear uppercut in close to lead hook lands clean (since archie likes to shoulder roll the right hand that uppercut is too close to roll that uppercut)

at 2307 rocky lands that lead uppercut to a leaning archie moore( Archie pointed out ali would jab his forehead and knock him off balance and that was causing him problems)

So leaning forward(which you shouldnt do ) was an issue too!

This content is protected

 

The reason Moore lost to Marciano was because fighting Marciano was like trying to hold the tide back with a spoon, not because he was susceptible to uppercuts.

 

so I give specific examples and you give some non specific crap about holding tides back etc. If you watch Tunney vs Gibbons too , same sort of issue for Gibbons who used his cross arm guard as a high guard(just shelling up) causing him to get hit with combinations (noticed the rear uppercut against moore set up clean landing left hooks to archies head from rocky) in Mclarnin vs Leonard when Leonard shells up with the cross guard and just stands there (relying on a guard and not on distance or positionining) mclarnin just combos til his shots get through.

 

I always thought he was being ironic because 'mong' was in the name and he always knew that he was smart. Like when a big guy is called 'Tiny' as a moniker. But I never knew it was a real animal.

Sam knows the defense that doesn't miss any protective aspect though and he's not really telling us what it is. He's probably an active fighter who doesn't want to give away trade secrets. Respectable. Duva-level gamesmanship there.

I detect some passive aggressive racialism here with the having to mention these names so attentively. Yes, maybe Cooper did have a tendency to not pronounce H's, but that doesn't make him any less intelligent or human. Sure, he had a powerful left hook, but not in an animalistic rage kind of way, like a big dumb angry animal. It was just a good left hook. Let's not be like that. I don't know what you're getting at really. I mean, you admit that Moore had all this experience against this young guy who doesn't even know his own name right and that kid still kicked his butt all over the place. Moore had no excuse really. Look at what Salido did to Lomachenko. Why would we hold Salido to lower standards than we hold Archibald Moore? I mean, either one is wildly overrated or the other is so shockingly underrated that there's no point in continuing on with this thread and we should just do a new thread on how great Salido is. The modern day Zivic or something like that.

The thing is I'm just sad. I cry every time this happens. I didn't want this when I came here. When I started posting, I was hoping to find other people who knew what they were talking about like I do.

 

Nice to meet you too.

 

None of us know we what we're talking about like you do fella. You're the yardstick for excellence in boxing knowledge, it's a heavy burden oh sad national treasure.

This content is protected

 

...

Okay, more sad now. I think only me, frankenfrank and Senor Pepe and maybe eslubin had the knowledge that I thought should be normative for the forum's purpose.

 

Greed. Boredom. Arrogance. Stylewise and technically, he was fine.

He was a dandy. He had great power. He knew everything there was to know about boxing inside the ring. But he didn't play the game very well outside of it, so it took him years to get a title shot. And, when he got one, I believe he only made $300. He basically fought for free.

And, when he won the title, he sort of considered it a launching pad to a heavyweight title. He always seemed to treat the light heavy crown as more of a secondary thing - something he had to drop down and defend every once in a while. But it wasn't his primary focus.

And he was caught in a weird spot where he was so much better than nearly all the light heavys, but he was never as good as the very best heavyweights. I mean, I think he had six fights with future or reigning heavyweight champions and was pretty much beaten up in all of them.

If he had just focused on defending the light heavyweight title and destroying everyone there, that may have been more lucrative and brought him more acclaim (but he was a pretty big star for his day, anyway).

But he desperately wanted to be heavyweight champion, even though it was clear he wasn't as good as the guys who held it, and he was so dismissive of his light heavyweight title and those defenses ... that the public seemed to dismiss his title, too.

Realistically, if he ignored the heavyweights that he faced in non-title bouts and just focused on defending his light heavyweight title, he fought so much he could've arguably made like 30 or 40 title defenses. He could've blown Joe Louis' title defense record out of the water.

Had he, I think he'd be rated so much higher than he is now (and he's still rated very high).

It was like he had a great thing going ... but in a way he kind of diminished it to the point of almost trashing it to try to reach something that (for as good as he was) he was never good enough to attain.

He was sort of his own worst enemy.

 

"Passive aggressive racialism" you either have your own agenda or issues if you read that into my post

What in the hell are you on about regarding "less intelligent or human", Coopers (Our Enry) left hook was commonly known as Enry's ammer, in same manner that Marcianos right was the Suzie Q and Johanssons right hand ko punch was Ingos bingo.

Comparing a 33yr old Salido who is believed to have intentionally come in over the weight limit, beating a 26 year old Lomachenko who was competing in only his 2nd pro bout with the added disadvantage of 'alleged' suspect refereeing, with a nearly 46 yr old Moore losing against Clay with all the physical disadvantages is most definitely not comparing like with like

 

State of this @Boxed Ears

 

Definitely odd how he destroyed all heavyweight competition except future champions Charles, Ali, Marciano, Patterson...to be fair he did fight three of the four after age 38 and he almost beat Charles once. But other then that he cleaned out the heavyweight division

 

Right. I can see why he was tempted to keep trying. But he sort of cut the knees out from under what could've been an epic run of defenses at light heavyweight.

If you don't show a real interest in your title and hold it up like it is your prized possession, others won't give it any more credence than you do.

 

Moore was 87 years old...

 

Oh, my GOD. He's still saying it! ^^^ Go join BLM already, Kernow. Jeez. And yeah they used to do that to Marciano and Ingo too. Like, they would talk about Marciano being hairy and awkward and like a "caveman" which was sort of a dog whistle. It's like, yeah, we can't all be smooth moving and smooth-skin'd. We're not all built aerodynamically or even dynamically. They would play up how inhumanly strong he was, like he was a neanderthal from one of the ancient European countries. I think Ingo was hairy too. "Suzie Q" even has its own origins issues that are suspect. The etymology of that is not nice, allegedly. I just see so many things in the way that you post that are too much of a coincidence, I'm sorry. I don't like the way this is going.