Yep, its that time of month again ESB. Too many damn heavyweight threads. :twisted: Recently Ive been studying up on 60s middleweights, and naturally Joey Archer comes into the equation. After careful deliberation and close study of the man in action on film, Ive come up with this conclusion: damn what an underrated fighter. You dont beat guys like Carter, Tiger, Gonzalez, and Mims (although controversial) by being an average, run of the mill contender; Joey was a boxers boxer with an uncanny defensive radar and a left jab as sharp and straight as an arrow (pun intended). The big reason Archer never broke out into the big leagues like a man of his skill set should of was mostly due to poor promotion and the reluctance of other fighters to meet him in the ring. His safety-first, peck and move style was never a big draw either; Archers game was textbook front to back, but he polished up his craft well. A peak Archer was a top tier ring mechanic whose skills would please the most stern faced purists and baffle most middles who put physical gifts over technical prowess. Although never a heavy hitter, his timing and punch placement were that of a seasoned veteran; Ron Lipton (who actually saw Archer fight Dick Tiger live in the front row at Madison Square Garden) described of a particular instance where Joey caught Tiger with a perfectly executed one-two that almost had the latter hitting the canvas. This was the same Dick Tiger who had warred with and conquered guys like Henry Hank, Florentino Fernandez, and Rubin Carter without a scratch to prove it. Emile Griffith himself once called Archer the best boxer he had ever faced; quite a complement considering Griffith fought virtually everyone under the sun during his heyday. Dont really know what hes up to now.. Apparently his family has been shielding him away from much of the outside world for the past few years Very odd situation indeed. Any info on this, or just your thoughts on the man as a fighter would be appreciated. This content is protected
they have the entire griffith fight on youtube. all 15 rounds in pretty damm good quality. i recommend this for a download.
I could be mistaken, but I think Joey Archer died a few years ago. I hope I'm wrong. I saw him against Griffith, and I've always been a fan. Hell. he beat all the top guys just about. He only lost to Griffith of course, but just Don Fullmer and I think Jose Gonzales (although I coulkd be wrong about that as well).
Much thanks for the "head's up!" I'd seen Archer/Robinson years ago, but because of your generous notification, I've just been able to watch Griffith/Archer II in it's entirety for the first time, and greatly appreciate your advisory. Archer's very much the definitive cutie. Moves right extremely well for an orthodox boxer, especially in the early rounds. Griff may have only come in at 152, but he was strong as a bull, a solid example of not worrying about making weight by weakening oneself. (He was under 145 for Napoles two and a half years later, and 150 for Dagge nearly a decade later.) If a boxer's in top condition at 149, he shouldn't be competing as a WW. Both looked pretty good in the final round, not particularly tired like most of today's pretenders would be. To me, the best moment came with under a minute to go in round 9 (at 8:05 on the youtube timer), when Griff feints a right to the body, then strikes out with a left-right, nailing Joey against the ropes, that cross being the best punch of the fight. Archer shows his toughness, not by hanging on, but by responding instantly with over ten consecutive hooks to the body in around five seconds, as Griff pushes him across the ring. Unitas, I don't know about you, but Griff's bomb and Joey's return fire were the highlight of those 15 rounds in my book. Remarkable to hear the NYC crowd's cheers in response to Archer's sharp jabs. Sounded like a knowledgable audience. Put off a little bit by Archer's attitude at the end, trying to exit the ring almost before Addie's announcement of the scoring. It sort of reminded me of Tommy Farr's reaction when Braddock decisioned him. Emile was right. If Joey wanted the points, then he should have come after him more. To win a title, one must take it from the champion. Not a good way for Archer to end his career, especially with Griff's express willingness to put the title up against Joey for a third time. (Archer's rude behavior, and Griff's agitation with it, would have been all the promotion needed to sell it.) Just think of it. They were nearly the exact same age, yet this was Archer's last match, while Griff would compete at the highest level for over ten and a half more years! Emile had ten more matches at this time, despite Archer starting two years earlier. It raises all kinds of interesting questions about what might have happened had Joey continued his career. He was only 27 years old when he finished it. He held a recent points win over the reigning LH champion, a titleholder who was nearly a decade older than Joey. Maybe Tiger would have craved a chance at redemption by giving a younger former conqueror a LH title shot. Nobody can say Archer hung around too long. But did he stick around long enough?
These two Archer-Griffith bouts, as well as the two Tiger-Torres bouts were the type fights that whetted my interest in 15 rounders where there was tactical, strategic boxing without any knockdowns or knockouts, which are not always neccessary to enjoy a good boxing match. They are "boxing afficianado" type fights that are not always appreciated by the great "casual sports fan" who only relates to the big names of the sport and can't understand, much less appreciate the finer points of boxing.
Good eye on the Griffith-Archer rematch Duodenum. The fight's brilliance is rooted in it's subtlety; a tactical battle with Archer’s precise jabbing and defensive savvy on display in contrast to Griffith’s grappling and bodywork. Not to say that it didn’t have it’s fair share of action however. From memory though, I honestly believe the fight could’ve gone either way, and in situations like those the champion usually gets to keep his title. And there was definitely some bad blood between the two for a while after the decision was announced when Griffith tried to walk over and congratulate Archer but was brushed off instead.
Joey Archer was a classic boxer, with a solid Jaw, His first loss vs Gonzalaz was a fight that should have been a DQ for Gonzales because of his headbutts, then the Don Fullmer fight was a robbery. Archie beat Ruben Hurricane Carter clearly,Tiger, and I thought he did enough to beat Griffith in the 1st fight but it was close. Archer was not a big puncher but he did drop SRR in Rays last fight. He was disgusted losing to Griffith, first because he thought he won and 2nd because Emile was Gay, it bothered Joey, Griffith was a beast in the ring(KILLED PARET) but he was sick he lost to Emile who was very feminine and in the 60's it was really odd. Joey could have been Champ and he would have beaten Tiger again at 175 if he could carry the weight. Archer was one of my favorites of the 60's
You know, I though Archer won the first fight to become Champion from Griffith and the 2nd I thought he did enought to pull it out and retain the title he should have won but the 2nd fight was a lot closer. And you are right if he was a good puncher, he would have been an ATG
But the fact that Joey wasn't a big puncher could be very instructive to novice boxers today. Archer did extremely well with movement and a superb left jab, along with the requisite conditioning required to support that style. He certainly was able to compete on even terms with a peak Griffith. Concentrate on mastery of one thing at a time, and it's possible to go a long way. Developing an excellent jab could be the best way to begin.
