When did Archie Moore peak?

Disagree on Patterson, that 1 is significant as Patterson is a blown up MW/LHW himself, although Moore may have been faded, Patterson's speed was too much for him to deal with not his size

 

For most fighters, yes, but old Archie was one of a kind. I haven't found a more impressive filmed performance of his yet.

 

Even if i think he shouldn't be knocked because of him being faded as you say, then that still stands. Even if Patterson was a relatively small man though, he was still effectively an established heavyweight and would go on to achieve some level of greatness at the weight (in the eyes of some). Archie Moore achieved greatness at light-heavyweight.

Technically i'm right, deal with it! (kidding)

 

I've heard that Moore was dealing with some serious issues outside of the ring at that time, which may or may not explain his flat performance that night. Can't confirm anything because I haven't read all the facts.

I'm a Patterson fan though and believe that this was Floyd at his absolute best and nothing should be taken away from his performance.

 

I personally think he was better when he regained the title from Ingo, but have no great objection to this alternative view.

Moore himself claimed that Patterson was his very worst career outing, but as you've correctly expressed, that does nothing to diminish Floyd's speed, accuracy, power and efficiency in this one (as is true for Ali-Williams and
Moore-Durelle II).

 

This is how I see it as well. Moore did well vs non-power punchers that were his size or smaller and preferred to box.

I would say Moore was likely at his best in the early 1950's.

 

Harold Johnson and Marshall were big punchers though

 

While both Johnson and Marshall were good fighters, neither were known for power. Johnson had only 32 Ko's in 87 fights, for a KO % of 36.78%.
In many cases Johnson failed to stop journeymen.

Likewise Marshal has 36 KO's in a 100 fights, for a KO% of 36%. Marshall failed to stop plenty of journeyman too.

 

They both fought much tougher opposition for the most part. If you actually watch Johnson and see some of his KO's you can tell he can bang, better than plenty that may have say 90% KO records against lesser opposition. Wasnt Marshall the first man to KO Charles? HE wasnt ko'd again until Marciano from what I remember

BTW if a journeyman knows how to look after himself in the ring he can be very hard to stop because he'll give no openings

 

Hard to imagine he dropped him 8 times aswell.

 

Getting knocked down 4times 2months prior in a hard fight against Bivins may have softened him up, how knows, and Charles was only 22, talk about jumping in the deep end, he has HOF career at that point with 2 wins over Burley, 2 over Maxim,

 

Moore's best win streak, leading up to Marciano he had almost a 50 bout win streak minus a diqualification and a disputed decision which he reversed with a KO. Moore also KO'd #1 heavyweight contender Bob Baker and Beat Nino Vlades 2 times while defending his light heavyweight title. A mix of craft and power made him the most dangerous at the time....OLD Mongoose never be another like him

 

Agreed. I think determining Moore's peak is tough. You can't really just guess, I guess you can pick his best performance. He was a genetic freak. It just give more credence to Marciano's victory against him in my honest opinion. People look at the numbers or his age but he in the context of Moore and his fights before and after that you can see he was still of an excellent fighter. Being 40 and all shows how well aged and how his style suited that and didn't get him taking many punches (Think of James Toney in that way I guess). Either way, shouldn't be labeled against Marciano the way it is.


And for the guy that said Moore fought better against guys his size/smaller. Moore's record is better as a heavyweight against the bigger 200+ opposition than it is for the fighters around his size. Didn't Suzie Q school you on this at one point?

 

Why do you say Johnson, Bivins, Marshall, or Williams aren't as good as Burley? Some of them hold wins over Burley.

 

No me and Suzie are pretty much in agreement with fighters of the 50's and have awsome respect for Walcott, Moore and Charles,+ co. I dont ever remember too much of a difference of opinion in this era