It seems people struggle to pinpoint this, obviously because he did most of his best work after he was 36 and people seem to think that he can’t have been in his prime because of his age, but I feel his very best was when he stopped Harold Johnson, genuinely one of the most impressive wins on paper in boxing history, stopping an ATG in his prime. I feel something must’ve clicked for Moore in his mid 30s, and he was far inferior technically in his physical prime (28 or so), and the improvements made technically surpassed his 28 year old self even with the physical decline, who knows how good he could’ve been if he had his peak technical ability whilst being 28? But his best version, I feel, was the version who stopped Harold Johnson. What are your opinions?
He had a surgery to remove stomach ulcers in his late 20s. That is the main reason he wasn't nearly as good when he was young because he was probably in a ton of pain which he wasn't in when he was older.
Based on what footage we have of Moore, I would say he was squarely @his peak for this fight: This content is protected IMO, he was @the tail end of his prime when he finally won the title & his last truly prime performance may have been this 1: This content is protected
It's hard to mark where's his real,true prime is,but I'd say he was good at his 30s till late 40s where he finally faded,if I get 2 dollar everytime Archie knocks out father time,I'd be a millionaire
