Archie moore is one of the most skillful fighters ever

[The Old LefHook]

That I got no problem with - he seems to have become a master of the fight game, not just physically, but mentally as well.

He was very articulate even in later years - not sure how trustworthy he was though. Some questions about his relationship with Foreman and Saddler after Zaire. But don't understand the details.

His foray into acting was playing Jim in a 1950s Huckleberry Finn. Directed by an aging, once great but fading director, Michael Curtiz (sp).

Curtiz was old school and use to working with professional craft actors. You can see when watching the fiasco he gave Moore no help.

One horrifying scence has Huck reciting a long siloquery while Moore is left on camera for the entire time having no clue how to do the very difficult acting of 'listening.'

It's painful to watch. And it was unfair that he was left that unprotected. But by almost everybody's standards Curtiz was a prick to work with, as impatient and difficult as John Ford.

P.S. I don't mean the listening part as sarcasm; it is very difficult to 'listen' convincingly as an actor and Cutiz left Moore on camera trying to 'listen' to what was a second rate child actor. Would have been a nightmare for a trained actor.

Robert Mitchum was known as a great listener. He could steal a scence from a fellow actor when the other guy had the lines. It is a real subtle talent.

Good review, Pepper.

[The Old LefHook]

You’re trying to say Harold Johnson is not a great fighter?

It doesn't seem very hard to do. Around here we separate good from great pretty efficiently, but you are welcome to make your case if you think you have one.

[IronDanHamza]

It doesn't seem very hard to do. Around here we separate good from great pretty efficiently, but you are welcome to make your case if you think you have one.

Top 10 ATG LHW.

LHW Champion.

Beat multiple HOF'ers and ATG's.

What's your case for the contrary?

[Ivich]

Oh, now Moore is even a top 5 all time great.

Oh, and go ahead and give me a great big remind of some of the ATGs Archie toppled, will ya? I musta forgot. We all know you have to beat ATGs to be an ATG. Who did he beat anyway? Was it Big Boy Hogue?

It does seem that Moore beat decent fighters and lost to all the great ones he fought. Isn't that a true statement? You are not calling Maxim a great fighter, are you? You are not calling Johnson a great fighter, please. You are not calling Durrel great?

The fact is, Archie seems rather short on legendary wins or upsets. He went 1-1 with fighters like Holman Williams. That may not dispute anyone's point, but I believe it does call for an explanation. Did he ever beat anyone who was even top 50? I am saying all this without even looking at his record. I don't believe he did, from fading memory. Prove me wrong. Who was it? Please not Bivins.

Sure he was cheated out of his rightful due while in his prime; yes, he was taken advantage of for life by Kearns; sure he did his best stuff late and when most fighters are past it; indeed, he was clever and cagey. But none of that makes anyone a top 5 ATG. Tell me what does. Is it knockouts over people you mostly never heard of? I can't hear you.

Harold Johnson beat
Moore
Lytell
Slade
Godoy
Machen
Henry
Jones
Hank
Scholz
Bowdrey
Bivins
Satterfield
Valdes
Cotton
I think he was a great fighter ,and I'm pretty sparing with the term.
Moore beating
Johnson
Olson
Baker
Henry
Maxim
Williams
Lytell
Chase
Sheppard
Richards
Henneberry
Cocoa Kid
Shorty Hogue
Satterfield
Slade
Lovell
Bolden
Bivins
Sys
Marshall
Chase

Impresses me anyway!
And he ran Charles very close in one of their fights.

[IronDanHamza]

Harold Johnson beat
Moore
Lytell
Slade
Godoy
Machen
Henry
Jones
Hank
Scholz
Bowdrey
Bivins
Satterfield
Valdes
Cotton
I think he was a great fighter ,and I'm pretty sparing with the term.
Moore beating
Johnson
Olson
Baker
Henry
Maxim
Williams
Lytell
Chase
Sheppard
Richards
Henneberry
Cocoa Kid
Shorty Hogue
Satterfield
Slade
Lovell
Bolden
Bivins
Sys
Marshall
Chase

Impresses me anyway!
And he ran Charles very close in one of their fights.

Great post.

And Johnson beat Charles mate, it was an SD win for Johnson. Not quite sure how it was a Split because he won clearly.

He also clearly beat Willie Pastrano and was robbed in one of the worst robberies I ever saw.

[QueensburyRules]

That I got no problem with - he seems to have become a master of the fight game, not just physically, but mentally as well.

He was very articulate even in later years - not sure how trustworthy he was though. Some questions about his relationship with Foreman and Saddler after Zaire. But don't understand the details.

His foray into acting was playing Jim in a 1950s Huckleberry Finn. Directed by an aging, once great but fading director, Michael Curtiz (sp).

Curtiz was old school and use to working with professional craft actors. You can see when watching the fiasco he gave Moore no help.

One horrifying scence has Huck reciting a long siloquery while Moore is left on camera for the entire time having no clue how to do the very difficult acting of 'listening.'

It's painful to watch. And it was unfair that he was left that unprotected. But by almost everybody's standards Curtiz was a prick to work with, as impatient and difficult as John Ford.

P.S. I don't mean the listening part as sarcasm; it is very difficult to 'listen' convincingly as an actor and Cutiz left Moore on camera trying to 'listen' to what was a second rate child actor. Would have been a nightmare for a trained actor.

Robert Mitchum was known as a great listener. He could steal a scence from a fellow actor when the other guy had the lines. It is a real subtle talent.

- - Some how, some way, I figure ol' Archie 10x the Jim that Mitchum could play.

Archie grew up in the Mississippi Basin and would've read Mark Twain.

[Willie Pep 229]

- - Some how, some way, I figure ol' Archie 10x the Jim that Mitchum could play.

Archie grew up in the Mississippi Basin and would've read Mark Twain.

I dare you to watch it! I double dare you! Lol

P.S. You don't like Mitchum? - one of the few "a man's man" in Hollywood.

Got busted for weed in 1949 and served time- when he got out the system tried to black list him - fans told the studios to F off and demanded more Mitchum.

[QueensburyRules]

I dare you to watch it! I double dare you! Lol

P.S. You don't like Mitchum? - one of the few "a man's man" in Hollywood.

Got busted for weed in 1949 and served time- when he got out the system tried to black list him - fans told the studios to F off and demanded more Mitchum.

- - I do like Mitchem, just not as Jim. I saw him mostly on tv reruns, whereas in Texas, any new John Wayne movie was good as gold for at least a years run in every Texas theater.

If you get a chance, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance as good a western as ever made. Prime Vera Miles ain't too shabby either, and if she don't make you cry, well, your loss.

[The Old LefHook]

Looks like Harold Johnson beat a lot of good fighters. BUT he didn't beat any prime great ones, unless you count Moore, which is what the discussion is about, and unless he actually squeaked by Charles once. He did squeak by Charles once, and managed a split decision over Archie one of the five times they fought.

Johnson beat Charles during his worst streak ever, and late in his career, when Ezzard was busy losing 17 out of his last 29 fights!

Johnson was not exactly wiping the competition clean. He was losing some and winning some. Was he an ATG? Maybe. He doesn't have the record of one. But one thing he has going for him is that he beat some pretty good heavyweights, usually quite a trick for light heavyweights.

How good was Johnson? Good enough to lose to Moore 4 out of 5 times.

Charles
Tunney
Spinks
Loughran
Greb
Foster
Moore
Braxton
Slattery
Rosenbloom
Roy Jones
Tarver
Hopkins
Ward



All those guys could easily go before Johnson. I think it is stretchy to place Johnson in the top ten.

Next question.

Can a man who is 12, 13, or 14th best AT in his own division be an ATG?


* * * * *

I am still interested in the question of whether a fighter can be an ATG without having beaten any ATGs. Personally, I think he can. When there is a paucity of absolutely ATGs, one has to judge by how a fighter did against competition that was real good but below the ATG level. Robinson himself did not topple any ATGs when they were at their best, that I can see, other than perhaps Gavilan, if Gav is one. But a record of 121-1 at one point, speaks loudly on Ray's behalf. LaMotta was significantly larger than Robinson, but not sure he was an absolute ATG, just quite good and competent, like a lot of Harold Johnson's opponents as well, it seems to me.

* * * *

There is still evidence to be heard, seen and discovered with regard to Johnson. I go with evidence, not knee jerks. He seems like a highly competent fighter at this point. I may have a little trouble seeing him as an ATG. If Johnson is an ATG then Moore must be significantly higher, since he whipped him 4 out of 5 times.

The one light heavyweight you can probably say is great merely from perusing his record is Ezzard. He beat all the light heavies that gave each other such trouble. He was shot by the time Johnson reached him at fight 94. Marciano entered the picture even a few fights later. During his prime Ezz outclassed them all at light heavy, which nobody can deny.

[them_apples]

Looks like Harold Johnson beat a lot of good fighters. BUT he didn't beat any prime great ones, unless you count Moore, which is what the discussion is about, and unless he actually squeaked by Charles once. He did squeak by Charles once, and managed a split decision over Archie one of the five times they fought.

Johnson beat Charles during his worst streak ever, and late in his career, when Ezzard was busy losing 17 out of his last 29 fights!

Johnson was not exactly wiping the competition clean. He was losing some and winning some. Was he an ATG? Maybe. He doesn't have the record of one. But one thing he has going for him is that he beat some pretty good heavyweights, usually quite a trick for light heavyweights.

How good was Johnson? Good enough to lose to Moore 4 out of 5 times.

Charles
Tunney
Spinks
Loughran
Greb
Foster
Moore
Braxton
Slattery
Rosenbloom
Roy Jones
Tarver
Hopkins
Ward



All those guys could easily go before Johnson. I think it is stretchy to place Johnson in the top ten.

Next question.

Can a man who is 12, 13, or 14th best AT in his own division be an ATG?


* * * * *

I am still interested in the question of whether a fighter can be an ATG without having beaten any ATGs. Personally, I think he can. When there is a paucity of absolutely ATGs, one has to judge by how a fighter did against competition that was real good but below the ATG level. Robinson himself did not topple any ATGs when they were at their best, that I can see, other than perhaps Gavilan, if Gav is one. But a record of 121-1 at one point, speaks loudly on Ray's behalf. LaMotta was significantly larger than Robinson, but not sure he was an absolute ATG, just quite good and competent, like a lot of Harold Johnson's opponents as well, it seems to me.

* * * *

There is still evidence to be heard, seen and discovered with regard to Johnson. I go with evidence, not knee jerks. He seems like a highly competent fighter at this point. I may have a little trouble seeing him as an ATG. If Johnson is an ATG then Moore must be significantly higher, since he whipped him 4 out of 5 times.

The one light heavyweight you can probably say is great merely from perusing his record is Ezzard. He beat all the light heavies that gave each other such trouble. He was shot by the time Johnson reached him at fight 94. Marciano entered the picture even a few fights later. During his prime Ezz outclassed them all at light heavy, which nobody can deny.

Out of this list I can't see a way Foster, Hopkins, Ward and even Braxton are ahead of him. Johnsons competition was just straight up WAY better. Fighting Archie Moore multiple times alone is something that completely wipes the table with the resumes listed. then add in all the other great fighters, he matched - multiple times. All we can really go by are resumes, Foster for example looks great but who did he ever really beat? He moved up to heavyweight and couldn't change his style and got dominated for the most part. So really he was a smooth punching LHW with a huge size advantage and somewhat weak competition. I hate saying that about him, cause he's fun to watch and has a nice jab and left hook - but thats his resume really.

Charles
Tunney
Spinks
Loughran
Greb
Foster
Moore
Braxton
Slattery
Rosenbloom
Roy Jones
Tarver
Hopkins
Ward

speaking of fighters that looked destructive at LHW but never fought anyone...Michael Moorer


ALSO, on the point about having to beat an ATG to be one. This can't be used as a requirement, because the status of ATG comes at the end of a career. On a given night some fighters may be great in terms of performance. Or not so good. I think it's too big of a requirement since a lot of things have to work for that to happen in the first place.

For example Norton beat Ali, Foreman crushed Norton and Ali beat Foreman.