Archie Moore....How good?

Moore arguably fought more ranked lightheayweights than just about everybody, and some of those guys were hall of fame greats like Carl Olson, Jimmy Bivens, Joey Maxim, Ezzard Charles, Harold Johnson and a number of others. He also has more kncokout wins than I think anyone.

 

Moore beat the B level greats and lost to the A level greats, thats how i see it. You name the 5 best p4p fighters he fought and its all losses.

 

Who do you consider the 5 best P4P fighters he fought?

 

lloyd marshall- 2 wins A level great

Holman williams- win A level great

Harold Johnson - 4 wins A level great

Jimmy Bivins- 4 wins A level great



- Most reports state that archie moore was robbed in the 2nd charles fight. so if you count that as a win, charles is by far an A level great

 

Yeah, because multiple losses to Ezzard Charles make you a horrible fighter. :-(

 

Arguably the 2nd best light heavy ever. Losses to Charles keeps him from the top spot.

 

With regards to the knockout record, lets not forget he wasn't always fighting top level competition. His resume is amazing, but he fought a lot of tomato cans inbetween his big fights and scored a number of knockouts this way.

It would be the equivalent of Mayweather fighting Bobby Giepert 5 times inbetween DLH and Hatton.

I would be interested to learn who has the most stoppages against RANKED opposition.

I rate Archie Moore top20 P4P, in terms of the awe-factor of his career, solely from a boxing perspective, I would have to rate him #1 though.

We can't ignore the fact that Ezzard Charles scored three victories over him, and that in three attempts he was unable to win the World heavyweight title - Infact he was stopped and beaten decisively in all three attempts. Gene Tunney, Michael Spinks, Ezzard Charles are three lightheavyweights who successfully stepped up to heavyweight and won the title.

Also, lets not ignore the fact that he was hardly the most honourable champion (I don't blame him, considering how hard it was for black contenders to get breaks in those times, and how long he was avoided for), failing to make weight over and over again, being warned and threatened for his title all the time, and in the end not defending his title an awful lot.

He is a great man though, committing himself to helping under-priveleged kids with his "Any Boy Can" program following his career. One of the good guys, and also one of the great eccentrics of our sport.

 

Some of Moore's best opponents happen to be genuinely great heavyweights or the best light heavyweight ever. You only say 'name the five best fighters he fought' because it suits your argument. How about this little statistic? Against top twenty five all-time light heavyweights, Moore was 11-5. Three of those losses came to probably the best light heavyweight ever, and even those fights were closer than the 3-0 would imply. 11-2 if you take away Charles. Against top light heavyweights, only Charles himself can rival that statistic.

 

Moore is a great example of a boxer who may or may not have had great natural skills but who was obviously a good student of the game. Watching his fights you get the sense that he knew exactly when to pick it up, when he was trying to figure someone out, where exactly to punch, footwork, everything. Repitition is everything, and he was a quick study. He logged all that info. in the computerlike brain he had and ouththought most guys, even if they may have been flashier or more naturally skilled.

 

Overrated at any weight!

 

yo john thomas,


you ever see archie moores filmed fight 1951 vs 6'2 215lb talented young prospect embrell davidson? joe louis was commentator before the fight and he speaks highly of embrells skill level and it certainly looks that way on film in the first round as embrell shows very good movement, boxing skills for a big man. Then right at the end of the first round archie nails embrell with a straight right carbon copy of the shot he nailed marciano with and embrell goes down like hes been shot and hes face first out COLD!!!

 

DAMN!!! Would have loved to have seen that one. I'd like to see more Moore if you get me drift, and some more Charles exposure won't hurt either. At 175 for both.

 

Ill try to upload it if i can, it might be too much space. im not very good with uploading large items. maybe someone can help

 

I also have moore-Bivins II 1947 very very good fight. Moore looks great in this one. His straigh right hand once again is the punch that essentially ends this fight and forces bivins to retire on his stool after going down at the bell.

I have moore vs Oakland billy smith 1946


moore vs richards 1940 is out their not hard to get


moore vs H johnson 1954 title fight is a classic fight, one of my favorites. knowing your style, i think you would really like this. this fight took place shortly before moore-marciano. moore looks spectacular in this one in the 14th, johnson really looks puzzling the entire fight. ONCE AGAIN, its moores straight right that ends things.

 

All of a sudden a close fight is a robbery. Lloyd marshall and bivins may have the resumes that make them great fighters but in general they are looked at as lesser fighters than marciano, burley, ezzard, floyd patterson.