Truth is James weighed in all likelihood more then Archie Moore on fight night that I am almost certain. So I took Toney's best version and one where he and Moore are of a similar enough size. Catch is this is Moore of 1957. Have at it.
I've thought about this matchup. I thought James Toney could have been greater than he was had he been more interested in training than eating. I also think for sheer natural talent and skills, he was even better than Moore. However James could be lazy in there and also had a lot of close fights as a result. Moore could be a little chinny later on, like in the Durelle fight. I may go with James Toney in this, possibly even scoring a knockdown and winning a decision.
I think he accomplished there abouts all he could’ve he trained very hard and gaining weight was part of the plan, miscalculations happen sure but I think he made do with what he could.
Archie Moore was still a force to be reckoned with even in 1957. But he was also really getting up there in age. Toney isn’t getting knocked out here. In fact he was never knocked out in some 90 bouts and despite fighting until he was pretty damn ancient himself. At 168 he’d be a lot Quicker than the aging mongoose. As much as I hate to do it, I have to favor James Toney given THIS particular set of circumstances
It's a close one, I'm gonna give it to Archie by decision. Both similar in terms of skill, most of the time Archie was better conditioned than Toney. That would help him in the long run.
Close fight, Toney was a slick fighter but against Archie he'd be in with a guy who knows all the tricks add to the fact Moore was a big puncher at 175 and I'll lean towards the Mongoose.
