This content is protected This content is protected 1. Moore. 2. Moore. 3. Moore. 4. Smith. 5. Even. 6. Smith. 7. Smith. 8. Even. 9. Moore. 10. Moore. 11. Even. 12. Smith. Because of the film quality of this fight, my attention zoned in and out, and was often hard to follow. However, it actually looked like a pretty good fight, with both being very active. This fight is a really good example of how scoring a fight can be tricky or just plain stupid when it comes to pre-50s fights where we have missing or condensed rounds. For instance, my final score is 5-4-3 for Moore. My overall assessment of the fight is very close to boxrec's accounts and the judge's subsequent decision. They scored it a draw. There's certainly nothing absurd about that. It was who won which rounds where mine differed so much from boxrec. For instance, boxrec had Smith taking 3 and 4 decisively. I had Smith taking 4 decisively, but not 3. I had that for Moore. It also says that Moore hurt Smith badly in rounds 5 and 6, but I thought those were good rounds for Smith. The 5th I had even and 6th I gave to Smith. It also said that Smith closed more strongly. While I did give Smith the final round, I thought Moore surged late, particularly in 9-11. Verdict: Hard to say due to the footage quality. It looked like at least a decent fight though. It really all depends on what you think of the video quality, not the quality of the fight itself.
Just to fill in the details of the summary on boxrec, the next-day reports from the Oakland Tribune: https://pasteboard.co/JUeAnQm.png and the San Francisco Examiner: https://pasteboard.co/JUeAX85.jpg They both tell the same basic story of the more skillful Moore ahead at the halfway stage but seeming to weaken in the later rounds. I like the way Moore was already being described as a "veteran" in 1946.
Oakland Billy Smith was another Bay Area legend , unfortunately doesn't get as much of the mainstream love as Jim Corbett or Joe Cowinski but he fought perhaps the best competition as the whole lot of them
