I was reading that ridiculous Marciano-Hopkins thread and it got me thinking.....How would Hopkins who fought Tarver do against the best version of Archie Moore at 175? Who wins and how would it go? Educated responses only, please.

I was reading that ridiculous Marciano-Hopkins thread and it got me thinking.....How would Hopkins who fought Tarver do against the best version of Archie Moore at 175? Who wins and how would it go? Educated responses only, please.

rediculous eh? how so, could you explain? if you mean size, then you are the one who's being rediculous, they come to fight at almost the same weight.

rediculous eh? how so, could you explain? if you mean size, then you are the one who's being rediculous, they come to fight at almost the same weight.

Difference is Hopkins is training up, while Rocky was training down. Difference is, you guys are comparing Rocky at his best to a Hopkins who was best at middleweight. Difference is, If Rocky could beat Ezzard Charles, it really isn't a leap to think he could beat Hopkins who has only fought at 175 twice. Like I said, ridiculous. Now please, take any further question on that topic back to the other thread. Any comment on Hop-Moore?

Difference is Hopkins is training up, while Rocky was training down. Difference is, you guys are comparing Rocky at his best to a Hopkins who was best at middleweight. Difference is, If Rocky could beat Ezzard Charles, it really isn't a leap to think he could beat Hopkins who has only fought at 175 twice. Like I said, ridiculous. Now please, take any further question on that topic back to the other thread. Any comment on Hop-Moore?

Yea and who were Marciano's opponents? light heavyweights. Quality>quantity, I could care less how many fight's he had at lhw, It's who he's fought.

I'm a big fan of Hopkins, I've watched many of his fights, he's the perfect example of a technically sound fighter, who lacks both modern attributes(speed and brutal power) yet still manages to destroy his opponents using pure skill. When he does have a speed advantage, it's a one sided affair.

He uses the feint effectively, and times his steps proportionately.

I've only seen a few Moorer fights unfortunately, from what I've seen Hopkins would take him to school. Maybe I need to watch more Moorer fights..

I'm assuming you will route for Moore, since thats your second nature - so lets hear it.

I've only seen a few Moorer fights unfortunately, from what I've seen Hopkins would take him to school. Maybe I need to watch more Moorer fights..

I'm assuming you will route for Moore, since thats your second nature - so lets hear it.

First of all, you should never assume. second, my nature is to be objective, something you have no familiarity with when discussing fighters from the past.

I'll be more than happy to outline my opinions on this match up tommorow. Right now I need to get some sleep.

First of all, you should never assume. second, my nature is to be objective, something you have no familiarity with when discussing fighters from the past.

I'll be more than happy to outline my opinions on this match up tommorow. Right now I need to get some sleep.

that's not true, I've changed my tune about fighters of the past, I'm very open about it to. I'll listen to what you have to say, and once I'm done with Carlos Zarate I'll start watching some more Moore clips.

But in all honesty, I can't see you picking Hopkins.

-apples

that's not true, I've changed my tune about fighters of the past, I'm very open about it to. I'll listen to what you have to say, and once I'm done with Carlos Zarate I'll start watching some more Moore clips.

But in all honesty, I can't see you picking Hopkins.

-apples

Fair enough. We'll talk more later.

This would have been a very good fight, they both know the tricks of the trade, both could have neutralized each other but I'm going with the guy who's more used to the weight and the guy who has accomplished more at the weight, Archie Moore and I'd give him a chance to stop Hopkins late, even though Hopkins has a very good chin, Moore was one of the greatest punchers ever, he also knew how to wear a guy down with body shots, would have been a very interesting fight, maybe not the most exciting but definitely would have been interesting.

Moore by cross-arm crab :boxing:

To be honest i've seen a few full fights of Archie Moore, but the footage is still limited. From what i see and remember he was a very intelligent fighter, who was probably the best fighter ever to use the cross arm defense. And he also had the kind of power to turn a fight around with one punch.

And as tough as Bernard Hopkins is i think Archie Moore can hurt Bernard Hopkins, with one punch. But Archie Moore did lose to Ezzard Charles 5 times i believe ? and to Charles Burley. Two smart fighters like Bernard Hopkins, who had good movement, very slippery, with good hand speed.

Now we could make an argument that if those fighters, soundily beat Archie Moore. With the same attributes that Bernard Hopkins could use to beat Archie Moore, that Bernard Hopkins stands a good chance. But i have never seen Bernard Hopkins fight someone with the style of Archie Moore.

So it really is hard to compare because none of Bernard Hopkins opponents, compare to Archie Moore's style. The only one i can think of is Gilbert Bapist, who used the cross arm defense but he doesn't deserve to be mentioned. In the same sentence as Archie Moore.

This is really hard to pick maybe Archie Moore would confuse Bernard Hopkins, with his cross arm defense and would be strong. Or maybe Bernard Hopkins would be able to use good movement. Be too slippery and fight a cautious fight, beating Archie Moore on the outside to win a boring UD.

But in all honesty, I can't see you picking Hopkins.

-apples

In many fights I would pick Hopkins. But at this weight, against this fighter.....no can do. Hop is a throw back who could fight and be a dominating force in any era, but he hasn't proved a thing at 175. Tarver isn't making any all time great lists, though Hopkins fought a beautiful fight that night. But against Calzaghe he seemed to run out of gas at the end. I can't see how he is going to go a full fifteen against the pressure and power Moore would bring to this fight. We're talking arguably the greatest lightheavy ever. A guy who fought a who's who of not only great fighters, but legends.

At 160 I may favor Hopkins. At 175 I think Moore wins a convincing decision with Bernard holding on for dear life towards the end. Jmo.

In many fights I would pick Hopkins. But at this weight, against this fighter.....no can do. Hop is a throw back who could fight and be a dominating force in any era, but he hasn't proved a thing at 175. Tarver isn't making any all time great lists, though Hopkins fought a beautiful fight that night. But against Calzaghe he seemed to run out of gas at the end. I can't see how he is going to go a full fifteen against the pressure and power Moore would bring to this fight. We're talking arguably the greatest lightheavy ever. A guy who fought a who's who of not only great fighters, but legends.

At 160 I may favor Hopkins. At 175 I think Moore wins a convincing decision with Bernard holding on for dear life towards the end. Jmo.

The only 175 pounder greater than Moore was probably Ezzard Charles. Charles only lost twice as a 175 pounder; to Marshall and Bivins and he aveged those losses. He defeated Moore 3 times and Maxim 4 times, yet he never received a shot at the 175 pound crown. Why didn't Charles ever receive a title shot? Was it racism or the fact that Freddie Mills, Conn and Lesnevich were scared of him? I agree with you that Moore easily defeats Hopkins by decision. Charles knocks out the Executioner. So does Bob Foster and Michael Spinks

In many fights I would pick Hopkins. But at this weight, against this fighter.....no can do. Hop is a throw back who could fight and be a dominating force in any era, but he hasn't proved a thing at 175. Tarver isn't making any all time great lists, though Hopkins fought a beautiful fight that night. But against Calzaghe he seemed to run out of gas at the end. I can't see how he is going to go a full fifteen against the pressure and power Moore would bring to this fight. We're talking arguably the greatest lightheavy ever. A guy who fought a who's who of not only great fighters, but legends.

At 160 I may favor Hopkins. At 175 I think Moore wins a convincing decision with Bernard holding on for dear life towards the end. Jmo.

you might be right, but i'd see it as a split decision at LHW for Moore. Hopkins isn't holding on for dear life at any point in his Career, he's too defense conscious.

i'll get back to you once I watch some more Moore.

The only 175 pounder greater than Moore was probably Ezzard Charles. Charles only lost twice as a 175 pounder; to Marshall and Bivins and he aveged those losses. He defeated Moore 3 times and Maxim 4 times, yet he never received a shot at the 175 pound crown. Why didn't Charles ever receive a title shot? Was it racism or the fact that Freddie Mills, Conn and Lesnevich were scared of him? I agree with you that Moore easily defeats Hopkins by decision. Charles knocks out the Executioner. So does Bob Foster and Michael Spinks

you might be right, but i'd see it as a split decision at LHW for Moore. Hopkins isn't holding on for dear life at any point in his Career, he's too defense conscious.

i'll get back to you once I watch some more Moore.

I don't think Moore or Spinks ko him, but I would give a fair chance of Foster doing it.

I was reading that ridiculous Marciano-Hopkins thread and it got me thinking.....How would Hopkins who fought Tarver do against the best version of Archie Moore at 175? Who wins and how would it go? Educated responses only, please.

** How about Poppy vs Iron Boy?

When Kellerman proposed Roy was the best ever and could beat Louis, Dempsey, Rocky, ect, at least Roy was at the height of his powers and in a ball park weight class. I agree, Rocky/Poppy stretches credibility, but it does highlight the mysterious cult of Poppy walking across the waters vanquishing Ali, Foreman, Valuev, every big and small fighter who has ever existed.

I created a Poppy/Arch discussion thread around the time of the SuperJoe to discuss the misapplied analogy to the ol' Mongoose who, literally, was as close a work of art as could ever be found in boxing. Everyone knows that a fighter in Arch's day got little credit for moving up and beating a minor champ on his last legs, and nothing else, yet that's all Poppy has done, won a single full LH fight against Tarver. PPPPPPPHTTTTTTTTTTTTT WTF!

Fine, he wins a political decsion over Winky at a catchweight, has a brief moment of glory before reverting to his dog act that critics have long claimed was within him against Joe, and I did him credit for a masterclass over a strangely lethargic, uncoordinated Pavlik at yet another catchweight.

Arch dominated his division for a decade at a much older age in between picking off the odd heavy contender here and there when he wanted a break from the genious of making weight for LH. Poppy is as far from Arch at LH as Tito was to Poppy at middleweight, but they have a similar cult.

Rest assured, I'm a true believer and expect to see this match in heaven when Arch sorts out this nonsense. He'll study Poppy's spoiler style, devise some plans, and start tinkering from the opening round. Maybe gets the KO, or maybe we'll be treated to a reprisal of Poppy's bow wow act on all fours, but Arch is gonna use this kid Poppy to paint a true masterclass.

** How about Poppy vs Iron Boy?

When Kellerman proposed Roy was the best ever and could beat Louis, Dempsey, Rocky, ect, at least Roy was at the height of his powers and in a ball park weight class. I agree, Rocky/Poppy stretches credibility, but it does highlight the mysterious cult of Poppy walking across the waters vanquishing Ali, Foreman, Valuev, every big and small fighter who has ever existed.

I created a Poppy/Arch discussion thread around the time of the SuperJoe to discuss the misapplied analogy to the ol' Mongoose who, literally, was as close a work of art as could ever be found in boxing. Everyone knows that a fighter in Arch's day got little credit for moving up and beating a minor champ on his last legs, and nothing else, yet that's all Poppy has done, won a single full LH fight against Tarver. PPPPPPPHTTTTTTTTTTTTT WTF!

Fine, he wins a political decsion over Winky at a catchweight, has a brief moment of glory before reverting to his dog act that critics have long claimed was within him against Joe, and I did him credit for a masterclass over a strangely lethargic, uncoordinated Pavlik at yet another catchweight.

Arch dominated his division for a decade at a much older age in between picking off the odd heavy contender here and there when he wanted a break from the genious of making weight for LH. Poppy is as far from Arch at LH as Tito was to Poppy at middleweight, but they have a similar cult.

Rest assured, I'm a true believer and expect to see this match in heaven when Arch sorts out this nonsense. He'll study Poppy's spoiler style, devise some plans, and start tinkering from the opening round. Maybe gets the KO, or maybe we'll be treated to a reprisal of Poppy's bow wow act on all fours, but Arch is gonna use this kid Poppy to paint a true masterclass.

While I agree with just about everything you've said my friend, I just can't be nearly as vehement. Hopkins is great, would be in any era. But he is unproven at 175 compared to many fighters Like Moore, who have blazed trails before him. At this stage, the time of his career he has moved to 175, Hop isn't on par with the best that division has produced. Had he moved there say after the Trinadad fight and been dominant we might be having a different conversation. As is, I'll take the all time great from that division over the all time great from 160 under these circumstances.