Archie Moore v Rex Layne & Jerry Quarry?

Prime Quarry would win pretty decisive victory over Moore. Probably a late stoppage.
Rex Layne performances were up and down so not sure. Seems Moore most likely might win a close decision.

 

Prime Quarry couldn't win a decisive victory over Ellis. You didn't have to be an ATG modern day super heavy to beat Quarry.

 

Fair enough but 68 version is still a little under developed. I’m going with one that beat Mac Foster he beats Moore decisively. Ellis like Moore was pretty good at heavyweight though they were blown up LHs. Moore barely even that blown up. At least Ellis was in his twenties. I ll take prime Quarry vs blown up 40 year old LH every time.

 

Moore wasn’t quite his best ? Neither was Patterson he was only 21 recently moved up from LH and he didn’t just beat him he completely outclassed him from the opening bell and iced him with 1 punch in 5th.

 

Moore wasn't a plodding puncher like Foster. The Moore of 51-55 was more than large enough and skilled enough to take Quarry. I'm convinced Moore would do Foster similar to how he did Valdez and Baker.

 

This isn’t the right take at all. Archie was way off the mark this fight. These are prime versions of fighters

 

Think Brion was ranked and Satterfield would quickly go on to be ranked. I agree on Charles

 

That’s the Moore I’m giving you the prime Archie 52 or 53 is why I said a 40 year old blown up LH. If it was the Patterson version I would have said the 43 year old blown up LH. KO Quarry 8th or later.

 

Archie was not a blown up LHW. He was 64-4 at HW only losing to Ali, Marciano, Patterson and Bivins (cheap shot that he avenged 4x). All HOF and only losing at 38+ after. Have no problem w anyone picking Quarry or Layne two excellent fighters who have beaten champions. But I wouldn’t take either to blow Archie. Prime for prime id take Archie over Patterson.

 

We can agree to disagree then. Archie very good maybe great LH was a good heavy in an era that lacked the talent that would emerge in the late fifties. The only 2 good heavy’s he fought were Rocky and Floyd both beat him badly. Yes he was outstanding for a 40 year old but he was still 40 fighting below 190 prime Quarry is going to win big in the end after maybe some early trouble.

 

He beat a lot more than two good HWs
Bivins x 4
Nino x2
Baker
Satterfield
Clarence Henry
Lavorante
Curtis Sheppard
Henry hall
Bert whitehurst

Maxim and HJ at LHW but both have great HW records. There is nothing to agree or disagree about he has a great record at hw. 60s were no better than the 50s like any other era you had the old guard doing just fine against the new.

 

Ahh true about Hall. Still have nice names like Slade, Parker, Cestac, and many others not mentioned. Lavorante had one good win. But let’s face it most contenders have about the same. Archie has a stellar record compared to most HWs historically. Whether you think the division weak or not he beat men who would later have decent success later on. As far as the point of the post I wouldn’t be surprised if he did drop one against either man but I’d favor him in both.

 

A bunch of journeymen. By the late fifties these guys were all second raters compared to the new crop of heavys. The best of the lot Valdez hardly a world beater struggled against the immortal Brian London but won on a cut.

 

Again not a proper take.
Baker beat Chuvalo
Maxim beat Patterson
Satterfield beat Williams
Machen beat Quarry
Harold Johnson beat Machen
Nino was a shot fighter by the time he met London. Still got himself a win. Also I’d say Archie was the best contender of the time. 52-55. Nino was ok nothing special. There really aren’t many great contenders throughout all the decades except a handful. Archie was exceptional.