If Clay vs Moore mean't something, then "Clay" dosen't need any slack cut him for the beating that Holmes later put on him, and Marciano's ko of Louis needs to be rated higher than it is.
It would have meant quite a bit if it was anything other than arguably the greatest heavyweight of all time scoring that win. Archie was no doubt ancient, but he was coming off a disputed draw with future LHW champ and HW contender Willie Pastrano, a decision most thought he deserved to win, as well as a brutal KO over then top ranked Lavorante. Ali only had 15 fights and disposed of Moore in 4 rounds as he predicted. But obviously there was no chance of a near 50 year old light heavyweight ever beating perhaps the greatest heavyweight of all time, so Ali should not receive much credit. It put him on the map though.
It was a mistake that they all make...not knowing when to pack it in..Archies judgement was suspect here and Clay was just in it for a well known scalp...
They are decent wins for Clay/Johnson but nothing great Robinson win is very good/excellent and underrated, there is an assumption Armstrong was shot when he lost his title, I believe this to be wrong as his best wins imo came after him losing his title and close to the time of this fight
I believe Fitzsimmons was fighting with one working arm as well as being absolutely ancient for a fighter.
Not really no. Robinson vs Armstrong wasn't a bad win as Armstrong went on for a few more years and beat some alright guys.
A little credit to the second . I doubt Johnson should get any for koing a seriously gone back Fitz ,and Moore was around 50, Ali's speed totally non plussed him.
SRR over Armstrong is a solid win as others have mentioned. Fitz was way beyond shot and Moore was only better in comparison.