Archie moore vs michael spinks & Michael moorer

Moorer would be easy to figure out. Moore only has to worry about his power. The difference in ring smarts and experience is monumental.

Moore by late rounds knockout.

Spinks unlike Moorer, can give Moore multiple looks.

If Spinks uses his height, reach and unorthodox movement, he can outpoint Moore.

If he engages Moore in a firefight, it could go either way.

 

Is that at the same time?

 

The only prediction I am comfortable making in this thread is I am very confident Moore could NOT beat them both at the same time!

 

Moorer and Moore could be a thriller with both men dumped on to the canvas .But its old Archie that scores the final ko ,around the 11 th
Spinks is different ,more tactical and awkward to get around. But Archie finds his way thru with his own immense talents.
Moore by split decision win .

 

Echo what others have said about Archie against Moorer. The Mongoose gets hit, hurt and possibly dropped in a gripping fight, but Moorer's lack of ring smarts let him down and Archie gradually brings that right hand in to play and starts picking the cleaner counters, ala that first Durelle fight. Archie by late stoppage having just about got back to level-pegging on the cards, having been trailing for a while earlier.

My instinct is that Spinks has a bit too much for Moore, though. I think technically Spinks holds most of the cards here, but you could say the same for Harold Johnson, and Moore managed to get the upper hand against him eventually, albeit not without some titanic struggles.

At 175 Moore probably has the greater resume, but I think Spinks was the more complete and consistent fighter of the pair, who could adapt to beat just about any style. The varying ways he dealt with Johnson, Eddie and Qawi were the stuff of genius. I'll go with Spinks to take the verdict, though needless to say not without some hairy moments.

 

Spinks vs Moore would be one interesting fight!!

 

Archie Moore vs Michael Spinks is Potentially one of the greatest match ups of all time. I don’t know who wins.

As for Michael Moorer, I think he loses to both of those men at 175. He simply wasn’t proven enough in that division and frankly he seemed to struggle to keep his weight down there.

 

Spinks beats both of them. Moorer is so overrated at light heavyweight

 

Dammit. Jel won.

 

The chance of Michael Spinks doing something in a boxing ring that Archie Moore has never seen before is very very small.
The chance of him doing it in such a way that Moore cannot handle it is only slightly better.
Spinks fought the best of his era. But you would have to convince me that fighting Vonzell Johnson, Eddie Davis and Marvin Johnson will prepare you to fight Archie Moore more thoroughly than fighting Ezzard Charles, Jimmy Bivins, Lloyd Marshall, Charley Burley and Eddie Booker will prepare you to fight Michael Spinks.

 

Nobody fights like Michael Spinks ...he’s incredibly awkward

 

He was very 'awkward' against Larry Holmes because he wasn't fighting like himself, in my opinion. At light heavyweight I always thought that his style was pretty straightforward.

 

What about Moorer? I think I know the answer but I like to see your posts. :[