"Powerful enough to overwhelm him" is exactly the point. Power alone won't do it, at all; if that's all boxing was, none of the guys that would use it would use it. It would be a dead system of defence. Overwhelming Moore is about workrate, persistence, footwork, placement, combination punching, timing, judgement of distance, generalship. Tua is shorter, slower, outreached by 5" and absolutely does NOT have the quality in any of the areas I listed to do this job. I'd say his chances of beating Marciano are considerably higher. Tua spent much of his fight with Byrd coming forwards against a guy who was in range and hardly hit him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYg4P9LZ2ck I opened this and clicked on a random timecode, 31:27. Byrd hits Tua easily, moves in a very tight circle, he's still in range to hit. He holds his ground, Tua paws. He throws an actual punch, it's telegraphed and Byrd blocks. He moves out to his right, he ducks a telegraphed left. He's in range to hit. He hits Tua often. This isn't fleet-footed running style, he's in range, much of the time. Tua just isn't very good at landing punches against a defensively excellent opponent. I don't care what you think you know about Moore's style - and he wasn't static, whatever you meant by "relatively flat-footed" - but this bodes very very badly for Tua. Again, Tua could land the blockbuster, but most elements of size, style and skill all heavily favour Moore.
Yes, if you are stating any of these things about Moore. IT's gibberish to suggest he was flat-footed. I would guess Moore spent more time on his toes than Bryd. You can see footage of him boxing on the backfoot on YouTube. But yes, he IS good enough that he can stand in with fighters who are better - not more powerful, just better at doing boxing - and not get hit. He was a special defensive fighter and known for his special defensive abilities and among the best ever at slipping inside an opponent's punches and then hitting him. In terms of ATG standings I ranked Moore way, way ahead of Tua and i'm very happy with that.
Maybe this terminology isn't as widely understood as I'd assumed but there's a huge difference between "being on your toes" and being able to fight "off your back foot." The latter almost always requires and consists of jabs, straight punches, and maintaining distance. Moore did not do this with any regularity. To the contrary, Moore circled and moved at times, but he had a front-foot offense. He regularly pressed the action, even against bigger and more powerful men, sometimes very aggressively. Even slugged it out with guys pretty regularly. I haven't seen him control whole fights with his jab, off his backfoot, while maintaining distance. Byrd isn't running at full speed but he backs up and escapes more in his fight against Tua than Moore did in all of his youtube fights combined (if I've somehow missed any fights where Moore does fight like this, please let me know). The practical significance of these two fighting styles against a man like Tua should be self evident. Byrd's style utilizes his reach (and height) advantage far more effectively and keeps himself further out of harm's way, even when he's not flat out running away from Tua. Moore's style regularly puts him squarely in Tua's punching range even more so than you think Byrd was, a real risk given Tua's handspeed and power.
I watched Tua against Rahman (1 and 2) and Tua-Byrd last night and noticed how easily Rahman outboxed him with a really good jab and decent movement, and got to wondering what Moore or Ezzard Charles might have done with Tua. I wondered watching the Byrd fight how Jimmy Young or Walcott might have coped with him. I think they have a serious chance of walking the tightrope and outpointing him. But he hurts anyone he hits cleanly, and I mean ANYONE!
My use of the term "being on your toes" relates to your talking about "flat-footed", not "off your back foot." Nor did Byrd against Tua. Byrd outclassed him. Byrd spent almost the entire fight in his own punching range. This was outside Tua's fighting range. Moore's reach is longer than Byrd's. And the basic fight plan that Byrd used to beat Tua absolutely contains elements of what made Moore so special; the way Moore would fight Tua has already worked against Tua in the hands of a fighter who is inferior to Moore. Yes, there are differences between Byrd's plan and Moore's typical performance. But these are matters of technicality that are far in excess of Tua's level; that is, Tua is so plodding, so limited technically that the differences between Byrd's approach technically and Moore's approach technically are in excess of his level. It's like arguing about which iceberg sunk the Titanic. He held his ground, like Byrd did against Tua, yes. But he moved guys onto punches as a general rule. HIs tight circle, by the way, is so like the one Byrd used, Byrd could have lifted it from him directly. Like Rahman, he had the power to hurt almost anyone, unlike Rahman he was hard to hit clean and one of the best counter-punchers to have ever lived. Moore controlled fights with more than this. But Tua was never beaten by a fighter that fought in this style, so i'm not sure what the relevance is? There's no way for me to know specifically what you have or haven't missed, but this statement is certainly wildly and hopelessly inaccurate. You don't seem to have even a basic grasp on how either Byrd fought Tua or what Moore was capable of as a fighter. I think i'll leave you to it.
All your posturing and insults about my lack of basic understanding aside, it sounds like you've gone all these years without understanding a basic but important distinction in fighting styles. A shame. Hopefully, you'll see things more clearly now the next time you watch Archie Moore fight though. Maybe one day you'll even see why people like me think the's differences matter. But are there any particular Moore fights that make you think that my descriptions of him are wrong and gibberish? As I mentioned above, I would be highly interested in watching them. Until then, I'm not convinced that his style would hold up well against 225-lb power punchers with fast hands.
For sure. Jimmy Young and Walcott definitely could beat Tua if they fought the right fights (i.e. jabbed and fought off their back feet). Never meant to suggest he was unbeatable. I just don't buy that someone like Walcott or Moore would be able to fight Tua the way they fought Marciano and survive!
young could definitely, (and still i have my doubts because he would fight in survive mode, and probably tua could win this being the aggressor in a boring decision) but walcott? with his chin? no way
it has become more about the preservation of a mythology than any actual familiarity with or knowledge of the sport of boxing.
Give me a ring when the next short, slow footed, slow handed 190 pound power puncher takes over the heavyweight ranks.
I think you seriously undersell Rocky with this characterization. Who would you pick between the past-prime but still good, Louis that lost to Marciano, and Tua?