Archie Moore vs Billy Conn (175lbs) 15

Hi Buddy.
None taken I assure you, have always held you, and your views in the highest esteem, since you have taken the time to illustrate your point, I now have a better understanding of your outlook, thanks for your patience, what we are in harmony with is the lacklustre ( nice choice of words ) posts, thought it was me just being old and grumpy, but the match ups recently have been atrocious, it's like the poster just pulls two names out of the thousands of fighters over the the last century or so, and aligns them up as an intriguing and interesting fight, when in fact the opposite is true, no names, that would be impolite and petty, but would urge members to give a little thought as to the match ups, so the rest of us can muse, and really ponder, who would be the victor, wouldn't that suit everyone, as I have said on many occasions, I respect any and all posters, less so the rude and obnoxious, of which there a few these days, but generally the conversations are polite and informative, which is good for the posters and the forum, so no you didn't disrespect me, and cannot imagine you ever doing such.
stay safe BoB, chat soon.

 

I lean towards Conn

 

Yet they let him fight Joe Louis....

 

That thread was made out of humor which is another think you lack in and btw Envika won in the poll.

Unlike you my like to post ratio is of no importance since I have a real life and dont spend 24 hours on the forum like you do.
Maybe its because your retired which is fine but im not and Im far from it.

If you think my apologie to you was sincere then your more of an idiot than I thought. Do you think I gave myself a wedgie also so I can be like you ? Lol.

 

Thank you. Conn having the style of a runner and/or running vs Louis, has an argument for the most commonly repeated and erroneous myth on this forum. He crowded Louis, if anything.

 

I've always seen Conn as more a poster boy of his time. I think Moore would beat him. Conn is another one that avoided some of the live wires of his time.

 

Archie's by competitive UD. I think Archie vs John Henry Lewis is a better fight.

 

Who were these proverbial live wires?

 

Charles, Moore, Bivins, Marshall, possibly Burley....

 

At what point do you feel Conn avoided these fighters?

Conn last fought at LHW in June 1940. He then fought at HW until early 1942 before taking a hiatus from the ring to serve in WWII. His final 3 fights consisted of the Louis rematch in 1946 and a brief 2 fight comeback against journeyman in 1948.

Charles was essentially a MW until 1941. Technically he was active at HW in 1948, but the shot, brief comeback version of Conn was not fighting at world level and wasn't a viable opponent. Otherwise, they never fought in the same weight division at the same time.

Moore was fighting at or around the MW limit until 1944. He wasn't a HW until after Conn's final fight. They never fought in the same weight division at the same time.

Bivins was still a MW when Conn last fought at LHW and didn't start fighting HWs until Conn left the ring to serve in WWII.

Marshall was also still weighing in and around the MW limit when Conn last fought at LHW.

By the time Burley first started fighting MWs at the very end of 1938, Conn was weighing in as a LHW. They never fought in the same weight division at the same time.

I rank Charles, Moore, Bivins and Burley higher than Conn in my p4p ATG list.

Id pick Charles, Moore and Bivins to beat Conn at LHW and HW, peak for peak.

To suggest Conn avoided them, however, is simply erroneous. That's without mentioning that he fought Joe Louis. Twice.

 

Really? In 41 or 46?

In 41 Conn was a legitimate HW contender, whilst Burley was typically around 150lbs.

In 46 Conn had 1 fight, his first in 4 years and even then Burley was still comfortably inside the MW limit.

I'm not questioning your assertion BTW, just genuinely curious as the grounds on which a Conn vs Burley fight was considered viable.