So he's top 10 ever at 175 lbs and top 5 in the world at HW. Still far better than Shavers at any weight.
Even if we assume that Shavers was as big as Liston, Moore proved that he could beat Liston-sized opponents. He beat Nino Valdes, Embrel Davidson and Bob Baker without much problems. He also beat bigger fighters that weren't as good as Shavers.
Compare here 218 pounds Liston with the lighter cassius clay https://www.google.es/amp/s/amp.the...liston-world-heavyweight-boxing-champion-1964 Shavers at 211 against Ali who weighed around 225 https://www.google.es/search?q=earn...75#imgrc=ZOanSoxDyEGGrM&imgdii=ilW42dtH2ykz4M Comparing shavers with archie Moore in size is laughable
So what is your point? I never said that Moore was as big as Shavers, I just said that size difference isn't big and that Moore proved himself against fighters as big as Shavers.
In an era he could fight in. There were many bigger fighters than Marciano or Patterson, Moore beat them. Let's not act like Shavers was a kind of giant that was unseen during Moore's career.
As big as shavers but tomato cans or not more dangerous and the guys who were better than shavers were smaller
Cool, but boxing is not about punching as hard as possible. Shavers lost a lot of fights he should have won based on your logic and he never beat someone as good as Archie Moore
Shavers fought in a much harder era for a hw and ended his career with 74-14 with notable wins Nino 48-18. Plus Shavers did hit way harder