Shannon Brigg vs Archie Moore

the ko1 pick was actually the other way, my bad.

i stated my thoughts on betting at those odds, i never even mentioned actual probability outside of 'tiny tiny chance', which you are right was a vague statement. if you want me to guestimate i would go with moore stopping him once in 20 or so. (I don't have enough money to bet purely on value and potentially wait weeks between wins whilst whittling down my bankroll on perceived value in bets that i don't think have a reasonable chance of winning. if i had that much money i would be retired and wouldn't bet in the first place.)

tbh i hold archie in reasonably high esteem as a hw contender in general, obviously he could beat some of the ranked hw's in any era. i like him more in his own time as his size and age were smaller handicaps than they would be in, say, the 90's-00's. i'm not sure that my pick on an individual fight has much to do with that tho. especially when i am not denying that moore could win, i just see moore ko as one of the least likely results based on the quality of briggs chin/toughness and the fact he was a big puncher so archie will have to be more carefull than he was against, for example, durelle.
rocky was a stylistic/physical step too far for moore, and moore couldn't stop him when he did land a great shot, obviously rocky and briggs aren't very similar, but in terms of matching archie up with a dangerous hw puncher with a chin i think that is a relevant consideration.

 

Moore on points, most likely.

Briggs has got a great chin, he's not getting stopped. He's also got huge power; if Moore lapsed in concentration, he could end up smeared all over the canvas.

 

I think that's a reasonable assessment. Moore would have to be on the ball for this one. Assuming he was, I'd favour him for a points win.

 

Like I said, I don't know another about Eder Jofre, or his chances against unnamed welterweights, and since Moore DID fight Heavyweights it's not necessary to talk about little guys.

I'm not really looking for a deep ana1ysis of Ali-Valuev, but your contention is clear enough : Unless a fighter has taken on bigger fighters and won then it's wrong to assume he'd win. The bigger man should be favoured.
Therefore Valuev should be favoured over Ali ?

 

i think molasses is a sugar thing - like golden syrup consistency.

 

Archie Moore's style seems absolutely fine to deal with someone like Shannon Briggs.
A great crab-shell defensive fighter, very hard to hit clean, crouching, weaving, slipping, a superb counter puncher, ample strength and power for his size, just under 6', and can easily carry 200+ pounds and be effective.
His skills as as good as they get, and he was a KO artist in his own right.

Briggs stood straight with his big head there to be punched, no real defensive game at all. He had a lot of power and good hand speed for his size, like all other powerful heavyweights in theory he could KO anyone if he delivers his best punch, but most of his bulk seemed to be a hindrance to him more often than not. Even against some of the bums he fought he didn't really seem to know what he was doing in a boxing sense, just a standard limited puncher.
There's a reason he was not a top fighter in his prime.

 

Archie Moore had every punch in the book, and some he invented himself.

 

Fair enough.

It's been a good debate but there's way too much talk about Shannon Briggs anyway, all over the boxing community, and now he's here in this classic forum.
I loved some of his antics in recent years as much as anyone but it's shocking that he's still fighting and allowed to fight for titles. I fear he's going to get hurt.

 

CHAAAAAAMMMP

 

Archie would have diced him up real good and stopped him late ..