Why did Archie Moore perform so poorly against Floyd Patterson ?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Conn, Jan 9, 2012.


Page 3 of 3
  1. sugarsean

    sugarsean Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,496
    14
    Jun 2, 2009
    read your post again you sick ****
     
    sugarsean, Jan 13, 2012
    sugarsean, Jan 13, 2012
    #31
    Pedro_El_Chef likes this.
  2. MagnaNasakki

    MagnaNasakki Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,658
    78
    Jan 21, 2006
    I don't think Moore would have ever looked good against Patterson.

    People can argue past his prime, but real speed and accuracy often taxed his defensive prowess, and when you took that up a level, it overwhelmed said defense. Floyd was able to do the and land a terrific shot, Ali was able to simply bludgeon Moore this way, even Ezzard Charles back in the day used his greater speed and precision boxing to execute.

    Just a set of gifts that Moore struggled to defeat. A lot like Hopkins, another successful older technician.
     
    MagnaNasakki, Jan 13, 2012
    MagnaNasakki, Jan 13, 2012
    #32
  3. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    400
    Jan 22, 2010
    Because old Archie was FORTY THREE YEARS OLD...
     
    burt bienstock, Jan 13, 2012
    burt bienstock, Jan 13, 2012
    #33
    Pedro_El_Chef likes this.
  4. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Not completely true, he beat Harold Johnson..a great fighter with fast hands..faster than Charles and Clarence Henry.

    Patterson is probably the fastest heavy ever, so I could see that being a problem. But speed in general..nah.
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 13, 2012
    The Mongoose, Jan 13, 2012
    #34
    Pedro_El_Chef likes this.
Page 3 of 3