How good was MW Joey Archer???

Joey Archer- KO percentage 16%.

Harry Greb-KO percentage 16%.

Just a coincidental stat.

 

Go back and read the press reports of him. It was often complained by the press and even his fans that he was more interested in protecting his reputation for not being knocked down or out than he was with actually and yet he won.

Unforgiven: Go back and read the pathetic post where Archer was lauded for "hurting" Tiger in a fight where he ran and refused to fight for most of the fight. But like I said, DPW can enjoy his fantasy whereby Archer wasn't protected and was some brave heroic figure. He probably thinks Archer was deserving of being in the WBHOF (which is fine since hes in such great company as Joe Barnum).

Griffo: Where is KO% the crux of my argument? The difference between a fighter like Greb and a fighter like Archer is that Greb actually went out, gave the fans their money's worth, and fought in a winning manner every round. Go back and show me all of these gift decisions Greb got by running and refusing to fight and just trying to stay upright. In fact Greb just happened to dominate twice each the two fighters of his era that in that regard were most like Archer: McTigue and McCoy. Archer never saw the day he was even a pimple on Greb's ass in regards to ability or accomplishment.

 

Yes, I agree, I'm not keen on those types of fighters either and they deserve criticism and should receive very limited credit. But it still takes some doing, to go a whole career without getting stopped against some impressive opposition.

Ok. I think you over-stated it by talking about "fearless, hard punching monster". That's a gross exaggeration of what appears was stated actually stated at the very least. But carry on making stuff up if you want. If you feel it helps.

 

My whole post was designed to be gross exaggeration to point out how ridiculous it was to try to paint archer as something he wasnt based on a fight in which he ran for 8 out of 10 rounds. But go on taking my sarcasm literally...


As for how impressive it is for a fighter to simply hear the final bell, well, we can disagree on that. When a guy like Chuvalo or Purrity stops fighting, covers up, and moves forward without giving any openings and by extension not really trying to win but simply wants to hear the final bell, is it impressive? Its not easy to knockout or even down a fighter who isnt really engaging. Same with the fighters like archer who runs, holds, slip, and only occasionally shoe shines or slaps to throw in the odd show off aggression. Are those guys really fighting? Are they really trying to beat the other guy? I dont have a problem with fighters who have to rely on points wins because they are smaller or light punching but youve got to show me something as well. Heres a perfect example: against Trinidad DLH ran the last 3 or 4 rounds and as a result he lost. It was controversial but DLH was heavily criticised. Now, i bet on dlh in that fight but was glad to lose because i spent a lot of money on a card i was heavily anticipating and DLH basically turned a 12 rd championship into an 8 rd preliminary. How much credit should i give Archer for having a good first two rounds against Tiger and then suddenly when Tiger wakes up he pulls a DLH not for 3 or 4 rounds of a 12 rd fight but for 8 rounds of a 10 round fight? Sorry, you dont get credit from me for that and its a paper tiger who steps into the ring with atg looking only to run and survive and then expects to credited for his bravery and the gift decision he got. Nope, sorry, that **** needs to be mentioned, not swept under the rug by pretending it was some kind of great performance he was some kind of great fighter.

 

K, I can see you have no idea what a fighter goes through. Do you know what it's like to face a Tiger or Carter, both despite what may discover in your library or in old newspapers were still very formidable. Do you know what it is to face another man who is more than capable of putting you on your a$$ with one shot. I know we don’t know what you go through getting all the dirt on everybody and your official capacity as exposing all these scoops on Archer and the others you put down.
When you say Archer was protected and made fun of "he made the most of what he had", shows true ignorance on your part. The point is the man should be respected for facing the men he did, nobody is arguing that he won or didn’t win, give him some credit for fighting them. You seem to have no knowledge of fighting styles. Ken Buchanan was a stick and move guy, the boxing lesson he gave Donato Paduano in the garden was one that still sticks in my mind, and basically he did what you said Archer did. Of course Buchanan was better, before you start whining.
You are like a cop who strictly follows the letter of the law everything is B&W, no gray. And in the real world there is a lot of gray.
You being a historian should be able to answer these questions. Please tell us, why would anyone protect Archer? Who protected Archer? Was the entire NY boxing commission in cahoots with Archer? Was Teddy Brenner, and the Garden? The mob? And who benefited?

 

Joey was a silky smooth boxer with lightning hand speed. No fighter ever looked so good in defeat as Joey when he fought those two decision losses to Emile Griffith. He was beautiful boxing at it's best, defensive skills like Willie Pep and triple left hooks like Billy Conn. He had a solid chin and his only shortcoming was that his punches had no power. He retired with one helluva record against the best of his day and was never decked or stopped. Sounds like someone here has a personal grudge against him.