Archie Moore vs Jack Dempsey heavyweight

I daresay that Moore beat better heavyweights (head to head) than Jack... Bivins, Sheppard and Valdes multiple times. Satterfield, Baker, Whitehurst... He certainly beat more dangerous heavies.

 

I wouldn't call someone like Valdes better or more dangerous than Fulton.

 

Valdes was probably more durable, but I believe that Fulton was better boxer. It would be interesting indeed.

 

At heavyweight?

 

Fulton = David Price a century earlier.

 

Why? He was chinny, but he was much better than Price.

 

Dear The Seamus

I look forward to your commentary. You are a treasure to this thread.

 

I love the Bros. Gibbons but Tommy beat almost no one of note at heavyweight. Miske was about it. I don't take Carpentier seriously as his greatest achievements in the division weren't that great and had happened over a decade before. The rest of Tommy's heavyweight resume is a croissant filled with ham and egg.

Bob Baker alone beat Chuvalo, Valdes, Layne (multiple times) and Baski.

And this is a head to head consideration, remember. The latter list of victims impresses me a lot more than the former.

 

Because he whalloped a fat, ageing Langford?

They seem about the same to me.

 

No, he had his share of wins against other contenders. Besides, this fat, ageing Langford still could knock out anyone. Nobody ever beat up Sam as much as Fulton, even Harry Wills.

 

And David Price punched harder than Wlad or Lennox.

The height and reach disparity was an anomaly for Landford. Even his elite skillset and talents couldn't overcome that disparity. Other than that he beat some guys already on the downside.