Officially Archie Moore was a few days short of his 42nd birthday when he KOed young Canadian LH Yvon Durelle in one of the most action packed title slugfests of all time.

Unofficially it was thought, like Liston, that Arch was several years older, closer to 50 than 40.

Hopkins is 43 and scrapping for respect against another older fighter in Calzaghe. Hoppy had to leave his middleweight home after being given the boot by new king, Taylor. Yet Hop jumped two divisions and beat the reigning "lineal" LH in a rousing bout.

Hoppy is 48-4-1, 34 KOs and Arch was an astounding 173-21-10, 124 KOs for the first Durelle fight. The only bouts Arch had lost the previous 7 yrs were KOs by Rocky and hard charging Patterson for the heavy title.

Hoppy wants to be a legend, but can he compete with the ol' Mongoose?

Let's hear the hue and the cry.......

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e3AD-O0bwSY&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e3AD-O0bwSY&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Archie looked very good in his rematch against Yvon Durelle, much better than he looked in the first fight. Moore fought like a man half his age, this is a must watch boxing clinic.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/27yYJMyihJw&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/27yYJMyihJw&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
The first one was a very good fight, this is the first round.
Moore was knocked down hard three times in the first round but somehow survived and came back to KO Durelle in the 11th round. Very impressive at his age, or any age.

Hopkins credits Moore and other old school legends like Jersey Joe Walcott for the style he uses.

The Joe Calzaghe fight should tell a lot about how well Hopkins can fight at his age. I don't think he has any offensive capabilites left anymore aside from throwing the occasional counter right.

Hopkins is a consumate professional no doubts about it! However, I'd have to go with the Ol' Mongoose. Moore had more knock outs than anyone in Boxing History, he was also very smart and would figure out the opponents style, and explot their weakness, then KO them brutally. He never ducked anyone and fought against the best, had a good chin, and came back from being knocked down and won a lot of fights.

I would take Archie over any middleweight who ever fought, except for Ray Robinson. I need to seriously think about that match up before I take a side. But I'm comfortable picking Archie over B-Hop. Outside of Tarver, Bernard has never fought the lightheavys, crusierweights and heavyweights. Archie fought so many of his fights against guys 20-30 lbs heavier than he was.

I also want to say something else. The three posts above mine in this thread were a pleasure to read. How nice it is to come to a site where the people who post actually know what they speak of and are not only students of our sports history, but lovers of it as well. You guys make this place all the better by your contributions. I read these posts and almost didn't respond because I had nothing different to add to what you guys already said. That's how close we think, at least on this particular match up.

I also want to say something else. The three posts above mine in this thread were a pleasure to read. How nice it is to come to a site where the people who post actually know what they speak of and are not only students of our sports history, but lovers of it as well. You guys make this place all the better by your contributions. I read these posts and almost didn't respond because I had nothing different to add to what you guys already said. That's how close we think, at least on this particular match up.

** Amen to that. Guess we got an echo going.

My take of a very good HOF fighter in twilight years vs a very great HOF fighter in his twilight years:

Arch lost several early on, came out the short end of the series against welter Burley and middleweight Charles, but he learned his lessons well in these fights. When he finally had to move up to LH, he had developed a series of traps and styles for different styles and used his power as his seal of approval. He outpoints a difficult Maxim for the title and defends when possible, fighting always, often well above the LH weight against heavies.

He was very tight at the weight, having to chew the nutrients out of his steaks before spitting it out during training, a testament to his discipline as that is not a natural act of a poor boy.

Always accessible to the press, he entertained with a perplexing, complicated theories of life and boxing, and from all accounts, a genuine, cultivated gentleman out of the ring, belying his poor, scrappy roots.

Very good Hoppy a bit taller and rangier w/no problems making weight. He does not put on the pressure from the danger Arch brought, and as such cannot set as many traps that could be as effective.

Hoppy does seem to still have his legs under him, so Arch will carefully waltz him around, letting him get his timing down so he commits more before lowering the boom. Don't think he can KO Hoppy, but hurts him enough that Hoppy has to go into his spoiler tactics, leaving room for Arch to easily outwork and outshine him.

I would give Hoppy an advantage in natural talent as he was very formidable in their primes, more so than Arch. However, Arch was like a fine wine during the aging process where the sum becomes a storied, one off year because of special conditions, much better than the initial ingrediants might suggest. In these twilight years, it's Arch hands down.

That Durelle fight one of the best ever IMO and should be part of American, indeed, world history classes.

Interesting fight. There probably won't be a toe to toe war since I don't see either fighter wanting to engage that way and they would probably turn the fight into a chess match. Both are durable and great fighters so it would most likely go the distance although I can see Moore stopping Hopkins at some point. I'd have to pick Moore by Unanimous Decision over Hopkins. He'd have Hopkins respect with his power and would outclass or outwork him in route to a decision win.

I'll take Moore by late stoppage.

The Old Mongoose would bide his time making every shot count. His cross arm defence was very hard to penetrate also. Bernard was exceptional at middleweight to say the least, making 16 successful defences of his middleweight crown.

B-Hop also stopped the 40-0 Trinidad in 2001 making the first Undisputed Middleweight since Marvelous Marvin Hagler. He had power in both hands and was hard to tag. As Terry said he's only fought once at Light Heavy against Tarver and never tested himself at Cruiser or Heavy. Wish he fought Toney at Cruiser in 2003!

Moore was the best Light Heavy for a decade before winning Light Heavy Title and is the most dominant Light Heavy of all time. Moore by stoppage in mid to late rounds.

Even compare their records with Moore's:

Total Fights 221 (1 No Decision)
Won 194
Lost 26
Draw 8
Knockouts 145

Bernard Hopkins' record:

Total fights 54
Wins 48
Wins by KO 32
Losses 4
Draws 1
No contests 1

Moore's record compared to Hopkins and any modern day fighter is phenomenal! Moore's had 5 times as many fights B-Hop's had and 5 times as many KOs B-Hop's had! It's very hard to go against Moore by comparing their records.

Archie excutes Hop in 4-5 rds

Officially Archie Moore was a few days short of his 42nd birthday when he KOed young Canadian LH Yvon Durelle in one of the most action packed title slugfests of all time.

Unofficially it was thought, like Liston, that Arch was several years older, closer to 50 than 40.

Hopkins is 43 and scrapping for respect against another older fighter in Calzaghe. Hoppy had to leave his middleweight home after being given the boot by new king, Taylor. Yet Hop jumped two divisions and beat the reigning "lineal" LH in a rousing bout.

Hoppy is 48-4-1, 34 KOs and Arch was an astounding 173-21-10, 124 KOs for the first Durelle fight. The only bouts Arch had lost the previous 7 yrs were KOs by Rocky and hard charging Patterson for the heavy title.

Hoppy wants to be a legend, but can he compete with the ol' Mongoose?

Let's hear the hue and the cry.......

Hopkins did not fight the lineal HW champ, he fought a ring champ. the lineal champ would be Erdei (sad but true).

Hopkins main asset, are his toughness, his smarts and his skills... The only compartment in which he bests Moore might be whiskers. Other than that I take Archie Moore by a not-so-close decision.

Well if you want to get technical, Erdei fought the "Undisputed" champ since the WBA and WBC were the two original titles and weren't unified until Jones did. He then also unified the IBF,which means he became the "undisputed"

Either way, Jones was the man since Darius didn't want to fight him. Then it went to Tarver and then Hopkins.

Though this bout, Archie Moore takes it.

Well if you want to get technical, Erdei fought the "Undisputed" champ since the WBA and WBC were the two original titles and weren't unified until Jones did. He then also unified the IBF,which means he became the "undisputed"

Either way, Jones was the man since Darius didn't want to fight him. Then it went to Tarver and then Hopkins.

Though this bout, Archie Moore takes it.

Roy Jones was definitely the best fighter at 175 since Michael Spinks, hands down. No doubt in my mind he would beat DM.

Still DM was the champ, Gonzalez beat him, Erdei beat Gonzalez. Erdei is the champ.

Jones got ALL his belts after the legit owners were stripped. Hill-DM was for WBA, IBF and WBO. The WBC stripped Rocchigianni, as you know, the WBC lost the lawsuits after that bull**** and almost went bankrupt.

Jones won the ring belt, because he at some point unified those belts, who were taken off the legit owner(s). That does not make him lineal in any way.

Jones was the man since Darius didn't want to fight him.

Jones did not want to fight him either. Jones' reason was a very good one (not wanting to go to germany), but it hardly makes DM a ducker.

As I said, no doubt here Jones would have beaten DM if they ever fought, but since they did not fight. Jones did not take DM's lineal title.

Well yeah, but DM was at the Virgil Hill/Roy Jones fight wasn't he? He was there to check Jones out and then went back to germany and that was that.

Though yeah. It sucks how Erdei is the "lineal" champion. Bernard is a much more deserving champion I would say and The Ring has enough crediblity to call their champions actually champions.

Moore never beat any of the real big names...hopkins

Moore never beat any of the real big names...hopkins
:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

Joey Maxim? Yvon Durelle (x2)? Harold Johnson?

I think I would go with the Archie. He's a natural LHW and/or HW. I think that the style and skill of Archie, plus his size, is to much for B-Hop. B-Hop can beat some of these LHW today, like Tarver, because he far better technically. He wouldn't be far better technically than Archie.

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

Joey Maxim? Yvon Durelle (x2)? Harold Johnson?

It always cracks me up that people think someone is a nobody just because they've never heard of them. Especially when we're talking about fighters from 50+ years ago and that person has probably been watching boxing for 6 months, without watching fights of the old greats, or doing any research.

I'd have to go with Moore, age for age, prime for prime, just too crafty for Hopkins.

I'd have to go with Moore, age for age, prime for prime, just too crafty for Hopkins.

** Just an update on this hypothetical matchup.

Can anyone imagine 43 yr old Archie Moore crawling around on the ring yelping like a dog for nigh on 10 minutes at various times trying to get Rocky DQed or subtracted a point deduction?

Anyone imagine Big George at age 49 or any age doing that?

Hoppy a guy modern boxing has been propping up for years telling us he was old school Philly tough, a throwback to Archie Moore, blah, blah, blah. Yet after 3 decent rounds against Calzaghe, Calslappy to his critics, Hoppy running like a dog, grabbing like John Ruiz's lover, and crawling on all fours yelping like a common cur at the kennel.

I've already picked Moore over Hoppy, but this modern hype and BS over these newagers has got to stop. Even his fanboy Kellerman was embarrassed to be interviewing him, Kellerman being the posterboy for a fancy empty suit.

Hoppy claims to be a promoter these days, so I hope he's ready for a lifetime of doggy acts to promote and I hope he pays them millions from his pocket like he got.

Just pitiable that he wants to be remembered this way after a good run in a weak era.

Yes Moore was a far more accomplished light heavy than Hopkins. Stylistically at their best both were fantastic technicians. I'd say Hopkins had pound for pound the better chin and hand speed, Moore the greater punch power and possibly ring smarts. Both had great defense!

I wouldn't want to pick at light heavy, Hopkins is too inexperienced at the weight to form an opinion.