roy jones jr vs archie moore....

Moore fought a huge amount of journeymen, so hes likely to have more fights, how many ranked opponents did he fight? Probably 10-20% were ranked. So 7KO losses and a few low level fighters in their prime is very unimpressive, it shows he was very knock outable in his prime. Jones didnt get knocked out near his prime (1994-1998).

Your maths is well off:

Archie Moore 7 stoppage losses in 220 fights= 3.2%

Roy Jones 2 stoppage losses in 56 fights= 3.5%

KO Losses against Ranked competition Percentage

Archie Moore 7 stoppage losses in 66 fights=10.6% 15% (I'm guessing the ranked opposition is 30%, it could be more or less, if you have the exact figure I can correct)

Roy Jones 2 stoppage losses in 28 fights= 7.1%

 

1. Coming from a man who holds his guard in a triangle.

Tarver cleaned out 175, he actually deserved both decisions over Glen Johnson, he beat Jones twice, IBF Champ Woods, ex-champ Griffin, Harding by KO, 2weight champ Reggie Johnson.

And yes his handspeed is faster than Moore

Olsen wasn't even a that good middleweight

2. We all know Moore is better in old age, he's certainly nowhere near Jones league in his 20s when he was getting ko'd left right and centre and losing decisions to welterweights

 

this is all opinion right here not fact since u did not do the research. u have no idea how many opponents were rated.........but i can tell u he fought around 100 fights against rated opposition.



I would honestly love to see how roy jones would do fighting archie moores schedule. no way he lasts. plus i can only imagine jones moving up to fight bob baker and nino valdez then dropping back down to fight harold johnson at 175lb, LOL he thinks tarver was tough on the weight drop?

yes this is what I said.....I simply did not move the decimal place over einstein





I find it funny powerpuncher how ur some big ezzard charles fan and rate him much higher than moore when in fact moore rates near charles level. he had much better longevity than charles and h2h....moore came alot closer to beating charles in the trilogy than people realize. also the fact u pick jones to win a wide decision over archie moore when ezzard charles himself was unable to do so, is very unlikely outcome.

 

1. Jones was the biggest puncher in the last 20years at 175.

He took Virgill Hill out in 4, no one else would do this, DM, Mormeck, Hearns etc etc. Hill was not shot to pieces, if Hill was shot to pieces so was Bivins who was on a losing streak

2. He took Griffin out in 1, who beat Toney, gave jones himself a tough fight and would never be stopped this way again fighting the best at 175

Jones always had the power to put away his man quickly, he would take his foot off the gas

3. Jones did not duck DM, DM was offered money to come to America and fight Jones, DM turned it down. Its pretty debatable if DM was linear or not and when you think the lineal line was established

 

I disagree here , on film the other night of archie moore vs jimmy slade 1952 moores handspeed is clearly better. but this is only one piece of the puzzle.
moores boxing skills, ring savvy, cleverness, punching power, punching skills, accuracy, jab, defense, stamina, toughness, heart all exceeded tarver's by a landslide. even his **** talking was 10x better than big mouth tarvers.

 

Bivins was 27, Hill was 34. BIG difference. Hill had yet to beat a single rated contender within a year of fighting jones, bivins had recently beat many top 10 contenders in 1947...and right after losing to archie bivins would go on a 6-0 run to start out 1948 with FIVE of those wins over top 10 contenders before running into and losing to you guessed it archie moore again!

honestly dude this was one of the weakest eras of all time. reggie johnson for instance was a shell by this time. glen johnson has many many losses, woods, harding are extremley average in ability, griffin was another has been.

 

op

 

1. Its an estimate, I don't think for a moment 50% of Moore's opponents were rated, as I said if you can prove evidence I'll happily adjust it.

But the fact remains in his physical prime (his actual technical prime would come later) Moore was ko'd badly, including a first round blowout.

Now talking about Jones chin being the weakness in this fight, while Moore himself was KO'd 7 times, including 1round blowouts is unfair

2. Fighter fight 2-3 times a year now because thats the most economical, fighting at a faster schedule isn't something that a physically fit fighter is going to struggle with, they have fights in sparring day after day sometimes.

3. I think Moore is a great fighter, I just think Jones is greater and has a style to win emphatically. Jones doesn't

Charles doesn't have an easy time with Jones either, but his more dynamic style is a harder 1 for Jones.

 

Moore is better than Tarver, I've seen quite a bit of Moore though and Tarver has faster hands. Your seriously not giving Tarver his due. Tarver can be very dynamic, very well schooled, fast 1-2, and big power in his left who he starched other LHWs with like the durable Harding.

 

1. Hill lost to DM the year before and was top4, he went on to beat Cruserweight WBA Champ Tiozzo who would later KO DM. Now he was past prime, but still a top fighter as Loewe will tell you.

Bivins was 8-5 in his last 13 when Moore finally beat him and when he ko'd him was 2-3 in his last 5. Thats not the same Bivins on a massive winning streak

2. Many of Glen Johnson's losses are robberies or at short notice, hes called the road warrior because he fights anyone, anywhere at anytime. Clinton Woods cleared out many ranked contenders. Reggie Johnson was still beating ranked contenders when Tarver, Harding too.

Why do you think there was so much outcry for Jones-Tarver? It was because Tarver came out top of an elimination tournament. He now has losses to greats like Hopkins and Dawson (Chad will be a great) but Tarver was 37-39 when those happened himself.

 

Yeah, when DM tried to comeback when it was clear that he was shot when he retired. Bad comparison.

37-39 with how many fights? Exactly.

 

An SD is a clear win? Clearly 1 judge thought otherwise

 

So What? Marshall proved he can beat welterweights and Green fighters. Except the Burley win is debatable and Williams won a series against him. Look at Charles smashing Marshall in 2 and 3 rounds

I'd not disputing Marshall was great but he lost 1/4 of all his fights, Charles was green, Williams is an ex-lightweight he lost the series too, Burley is an ex welterweight he won an SD over. He is a top fighter but that puts some of his wins in perspective.

AND Marshall was a Middle-Supermiddle and weighed 162lbs when Moore fought him and is not better at the 175lb limit than Tarver, who would weigh in around 190-195 himself on fight night

Maxim just looked very very average on film, Hill or Tarver beat him in an 8-4 type decision. As for Maxim's 'wins' the Patterson was definately a robbery, Walcott one was a potential robbery, SRR was heat exhausted ex-welterweight/lightweight and Bivins was way past his prime

 

1. This is true but 16-17 Champions are 16-17 of the very top contenders and somewhere the very elite, while others slightly below.

The again politics and there has always been average world champions, the fact Charles wasn't light heavyweight champion devalues the world championship of that time. Joey Maxim is decent but has pretty average skills and I see plenty of Jones opponents beating him

2. Yes I agree its shocking it was so hard to get a world title shot, if you were a good black fighter. Moore had to work his way to the top fighting everyone. But Jones for the most part fought everyone worth fighting himself, minus a name or 2.

3. Jones fights 2-3 times a year because of economics/TV dates etc etc. It doesn't mean he'd have a problem fighting more than that, boxers fight in gyms daily. If you can beat someone comprehensively you can fight 10 times a year without it taking too much out of you.

4. I disagree Moore was facing better top fighters outside of Charles

5. You think dehydrating, weaking your body and fighting 200lb men who have also drained themselves at 175lbs is faking it? I take you haven't had to dehydrate yourself then? Some of the LHWs Jones fought were bigger than some of the HWs Moore faced

6. Yes but fighting every 2-4weeks actually can keep a fighter sharp and keep ring rust off.

7. Jones regularly has gone from 190-175, if he didnt have to fight at the 175 limit he'd probably fight at 185 much like Moore, no in his prime this is no problem, because he always did it

Many will rank Ruiz ahead of Bivins on HW lists, and Ruiz is far bigger, this is tougher for a 175lber.

Jones didn't just beat Toney and Ruiz emphatically, he beat everyone he faced emphatically until he faced Tarver way past this prime.

Now if he faced each fighter he beat emphatically (ie all of them) 5 times a piece, what will happen? Especially after they have a loser mentality after being schooled/brutally ko'd. I'm asking you this because Jones can only fight and be accurately measured against fighters from his era. I know its hard to maintain a winning streak when fighting every 2-4 weeks but how does it affect Jones if he does that today?

Which fighter that Jones faced would beat him in a 5 fight series?

8. Yes Moore was dominant, but he's just not as nearly impressive on film. Now you are right Jones had advantages to making him a better boxer, but that doesn't change the fact he is:

Jones being trained to be a boxer since he was a little 4yo helps him, he became well schooled at a younger age, boxing was instilled in him, Moore was never trained as a boxer as a young boy

Jones reached prime in his early 20s when the human body is in its peak physical prime, Moore was still learning his craft at this age

Jones has modern nutrition, supplements, weight training, boxing videos, world class trainers

Jones is simply a far greater athlete, the greatest athlete boxing has ever seen

 

1. Yes but DM was supposed to fight Tiozzo in the 90s, both were past their primes when they fought. If Tiozzo had stayed at 175 maybe he would have been the better LHW.

2. 37-39 is past prime even if you haven't had allot of fights, its called getting old Certaily not shot but past physical prime