MARCIANO V MOORE

barney4001

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0er2lGRYqX8&feature=watch-vrec

a fight that went on to long for Archie

gene_tunney

They look like modern day journeymen having a slugfest.

megadodge

I know Archie went to his grave believing Rocky got the benefit of a long count in the second.

megadodge

gene_tunney wrote: »

They look like modern day journeymen having a slugfest.

Oh boy, Walshb will be on here any minute to admonish you and explain to us how "subtle" Rocky was.



For "subtle" read "not very skilful".

gene_tunney

megadodge wrote: »

I know Archie went to his grave believing Rocky got the benefit of a long count in the second.

Yeah, I've actually heard that. Interestingly the videos are edited to disguise this.

gene_tunney

megadodge wrote: »

For "subtle" read "not very skilful".

lol he was an absolute slugger. He was damn good at sluggin' tho!

barney4001

he got a very close decision against a young Roland La Starza

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

lol he was an absolute slugger. He was damn good at sluggin' tho!

But as you say, a very good one. Had a hell of an array of shots. Yes, he could look awkward, but he had excellent power. Could power shoot of both wings. Difficult to tag at times with that lovely crouched defense. Anyway, skill is a subjective term. He wasn't the typical fluid skillster', but he was a very skilled brawler/fighter, with a lot of intangibles.

cowzerp

He was a rough tough man with barely any skill of note-Losing an amateur fight during his unbeaten Pro fight must have been a sickener!!!

barney4001

The Ring Magazine was of the opinion that Joe Louis side stepped Archie Moore way back then, I remember well the front cover of The Ring had a type of comic strip of Moore running with arms outstretched trying to catch the heavyweight crown,my own opinion of it was Louis did avoid a match with Moore

Big Ears

cowzerp wrote: »

He was a rough tough man with barely any skill of note-Losing an amateur fight during his unbeaten Pro fight must have been a sickener!!!

He could really wallop, he had very good stamina, he was very physically strong and he could really take a shot, but box he could not. Even for a brawler he was that skilled imo, but he played to his strengths and played to them very well. Overcoming men with his superior intangibles was par for the course of Marciano's career.

A skilled brawler is someone like Jose Luis Castillo, or the reformed Marcus Maidana

MickFleetwood

gene_tunney wrote: »

They look like modern day journeymen having a slugfest.

whilst I agree marciano may have been fairly primitive, to say archie moore looks like a journeyman showcases pure ignorance as to what it is you're watching.

he had a beautiful counter-right hand, defense, etc.

megadodge

MickFleetwood wrote: »

whilst I agree marciano may have been fairly primitive, to say archie moore looks like a journeyman showcases pure ignorance as to what it is you're watching.

he had a beautiful counter-right hand, defense, etc.

I'm a big admirer of Moore and yes he was a brilliant figher, boxer, tactician, puncher etc. but in the context of this thread what's being discussed is what's on the edited video.

And that ain't pretty.

barney4001

barney4001 wrote: »

The Ring Magazine was of the opinion that Joe Louis side stepped Archie Moore way back then, I remember well the front cover of The Ring had a type of comic strip of Moore running with arms outstretched trying to catch the heavyweight crown,my own opinion of it was Louis did avoid a match with Moore

Here we go

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine_Covers:_1952

Looking at Moore's record I would say his prime was between 1950-1960. Between the start of 1950 and the beginning of 1960 he had a total of 73 contests and only lost three. One was to future light heavyweight champion Harold Johnson which was later avenged and the other two were to world heavyweight champions. Also he was world light heavyweight champion from 1951, so almost all of his fights during this period were against world class opposition, a few of them heavyweights too.
They say most fighters reach their prime between the ages of 25 and 30 but Moore was one of the few who reached his prime in his mid thirties and seemed to keep it until his mid forties.

megadodge

Barney, you seem to be contradicting yourself here.

You claimed Louis avoided defending his title against Moore, but Louis retired as reigning heavyweight champ in 1948/49. Moore didn't win the light-heavy crown until 1951!!

Of course there's no doubt that Moore was definitely an avoided fighter. He operated for 10 years at middleweight but nobody ever gave him a shot. Then up at light-heavy he only got one when it was thought he was past it. He wasn't.

barney4001

megadodge wrote: »

Barney, you seem to be contradicting yourself here.

You claimed Louis avoided defending his title against Moore, but Louis retired as reigning heavyweight champ in 1948/49. Moore didn't win the light-heavy crown until 1951!!

Of course there's no doubt that Moore was definitely an avoided fighter. He operated for 10 years at middleweight but nobody ever gave him a shot. Then up at light-heavy he only got one when it was thought he was past it. He wasn't.

it was a long time from i last seen The Ring Magazine and way back then 1952 i was under the impression it was the heavyweight crown Moore was chaseing so it seems i was wrong in that case good luck barney