Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:17

What do you make of this quote of the "Old Mongoose" ? After all, he should know.

sockdolager · Post by **sockdolager** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:22

Moore knew all too well how good a prime Charles was falling to him 3 times. Its a reasonable statement, I dont agree but his word surely takes presidence over mine.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:26

pundit wrote:What do you make of this quote of the "Old Mongoose" ? After all, he should know.

please provide ur source that moore said this

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:29

moore also says a lot of things. archies a very intelligent con man.

i mean moore once said "i dont believe a man past present of future can slug it out with marciano and come out alive".

are u gonna believe this one too?

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:31

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
pundit wrote:What do you make of this quote of the "Old Mongoose" ? After all, he should know.

please provide ur source that moore said this

Gail Evans, "the kings of the ring", opening quote of the Ezzard Charles section.

To be honest, that quote doesn't look that absurd to me, given that post-prime Charles was twice on the edge of beating Marciano.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:32

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:moore also says a lot of things. archies a very intelligent con man.

i mean moore once said "i dont believe a man past present of future can slug it out with marciano and come out alive".

are u gonna believe this one too?

Emphasis on "slug it out".

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:40

could the 1948 prime charles have beaten rocky? sure, charles has a great style to beat the rock. but in a 3 fight series I cant see him taking the rock. i favor rocky 2 out of 3.

im gonna steal a quote from one of my friends, i agree with this statement.

"Charles in 1948 was more fleet-footed and sharp than in '54, but the stamina, workrate, and sheer tenacity Charles possessed in that first fight nearly equal what he'd had in those times. Anyway, the Charles of '48 would have been more elusive than the Charles of '54, but he would never have been able to stand up to so much pressure and punishment and carry on at such an incredible pace as he did in '54. I think it pretty well balances out. Marciano by close decision or late stoppage."

in a 3 fight series

fight 1 charles 15 unanimous

fight 2 marciano KO 9 charles

fight 3 marciano KO 14 charles

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:40

pundit wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:moore also says a lot of things. archies a very intelligent con man.

i mean moore once said "i dont believe a man past present of future can slug it out with marciano and come out alive".

are u gonna believe this one too?
Emphasis on "slug it out".

exactly...I think BB you may have missed a subtle nuance that the old mongoose was trying to get across

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:41

The Charles fights were close, one by decision, the other by being possibly stopped---either way Marciano won. Marciano had to up the ante in the second fight else he would lose his crown and he blew away Charles. In the first fight Charles was still a great fighter, and the fight was so heavily contested that there was only one clinch in 15 rounds.

Charles wasn't washed up. Maybe not in his peak, but wasn't that far from it either.

And I agree, Moore's assumption that a prime Charles could beat Marciano easily is possibly biased considering Moore could do nothing with Charles at Light Heavyweight.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:41

pundit wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
pundit wrote:What do you make of this quote of the "Old Mongoose" ? After all, he should know.

please provide ur source that moore said this
Gail Evans, "the kings of the ring", opening quote of the Ezzard Charles section.

To be honest, that quote doesn't look that absurd to me, given that post-prime Charles was twice on the edge of beating Marciano.

TWICE? DID U SEE THE 2ND FIGHT? marciano beat the shit out of charles winning every round and knocking him down in the 2nd round. outside of the fluke cut, it was a massacre domination.

the first fight was a close but CLEAR unanimous decision for rock

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:42

BoxBuzz wrote:
pundit wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:moore also says a lot of things. archies a very intelligent con man.

i mean moore once said "i dont believe a man past present of future can slug it out with marciano and come out alive".

are u gonna believe this one too?
Emphasis on "slug it out".
exactly...I think BB you may have missed a subtle nuance that the old mongoose was trying to get across

u guys arnt getting the point. this means moore believe foreman cant slug it out with marciano and come out alive. are u gonna believe this statement now?

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:43

"Charles in 1948 was more fleet-footed and sharp than in '54, but the stamina, workrate, and sheer tenacity Charles possessed in that first fight nearly equal what he'd had in those times. Anyway, the Charles of '48 would have been more elusive than the Charles of '54, but he would never have been able to stand up to so much pressure and punishment and carry on at such an incredible pace as he did in '54. I think it pretty well balances out. Marciano by close decision or late stoppage."

in a 3 fight series

fight 1 charles 15 unanimous

fight 2 marciano KO 9 charles

fight 3 marciano KO 14 charles

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:44

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:
pundit wrote: Emphasis on "slug it out".
exactly...I think BB you may have missed a subtle nuance that the old mongoose was trying to get across
When was the quote made? maybe it was pre-Foreman...

Anyway, it sounds more like a testament to Rocky and maybe not soemthing that should be taken too literally. Whoever you are, going into a slug out with Marciano is playing to his strengths.

u guys arnt getting the point. this means moore believe foreman cant slug it out with marciano and come out alive. are u gonna believe this statement now?

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 28 Jul 2006, 11:49

It's hard for me to envision Marciano beating Foreman...every other champion before or since, I can see Marciano beating...but not Foreman.

The only chance Marciano would have is if he survived the first 7 or 8 rounds and then it would be a question of who had the better stamina and endurance.

Alot of people say that Marciano would have 100% no chance at beating Foreman...but I do think Marciano would have a better chance at winning that what Joe Frazier would---only that Joe Frazier was more aggressive, so that left him open for more shots---and he did not fight from the crouch as good as Marciano, and the bobbing and weaving Marciano had, being as small as he was to begin with, would have made him an extremely small target to hit, considering Foreman was nearly 6'4" and 220 pounds.

But Foreman is the one man I can't see Marciano beating. Let alone slug it out with.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 12:18

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
pundit wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
please provide ur source that moore said this
Gail Evans, "the kings of the ring", opening quote of the Ezzard Charles section.

To be honest, that quote doesn't look that absurd to me, given that post-prime Charles was twice on the edge of beating Marciano.

TWICE? DID U SEE THE 2ND FIGHT? marciano beat the shit out of charles winning every round and knocking him down in the 2nd round. outside of the fluke cut, it was a massacre domination.

the first fight was a close but CLEAR unanimous decision for rock

Marciano was on the verge of being stopped on cuts in the second fight.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 12:31

pundit wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
pundit wrote: Gail Evans, "the kings of the ring", opening quote of the Ezzard Charles section.

To be honest, that quote doesn't look that absurd to me, given that post-prime Charles was twice on the edge of beating Marciano.

TWICE? DID U SEE THE 2ND FIGHT? marciano beat the shit out of charles winning every round and knocking him down in the 2nd round. outside of the fluke cut, it was a massacre domination.

the first fight was a close but CLEAR unanimous decision for rock
Marciano was on the verge of being stopped on cuts in the second fight.

but rocky was also beating the shit out of charles. he had won every single of the first 7 rounds.

the cut was pretty much a fluke elbow charles caught marciano. an ELBOW, not a punch.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 28 Jul 2006, 12:33

Punki can't give the source of his "quote."

WHERE did Archie Moore supposedly say this?

WHEN did Archie Moore say this?

Your "source" IS NOT a source.

The usual crap from punk-it.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:11

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
pundit wrote:
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
TWICE? DID U SEE THE 2ND FIGHT? marciano beat the shit out of charles winning every round and knocking him down in the 2nd round. outside of the fluke cut, it was a massacre domination.

the first fight was a close but CLEAR unanimous decision for rock
Marciano was on the verge of being stopped on cuts in the second fight.
but rocky was also beating the shit out of charles. he had won every single of the first 7 rounds.

the cut was pretty much a fluke elbow charles caught marciano. an ELBOW, not a punch.

Nonetheless, at the end of round 7 Marciano was bleeding so heaviliy that the doc gave him one more round before the fight would be stopped. Marciano went then on all-out attack and delivered the KO, while Charles made the mistake to try to slug it out instead of running.

I can't see anything wrong with the statement "Chalres was on the edge of beating Marciano". Losing cuts is losing, beating on cuts is beating.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:12

granberry wrote:Punki can't give the source of his "quote."

WHERE did Archie Moore supposedly say this?

WHEN did Archie Moore say this?

Your "source" IS NOT a source.

Your brain is NOT a brain.

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:15

Here's the relevant excerpt from the quoted interview with Moore:

Question: You fought nine world champions and seven Hall-of Famers. You won four of five fights from Jimmy Bivins and all three fights against Joey Maxim. Since you lost all three fights against Ezzard Charles, you have to consider him among the greatest fighters you ever fought.

Moore: "I would have to put Charles up there with the greatest fighters of all time. He gets too little credit from boxing critics. I think he would have beaten Marciano in his prime. When Rocky fought Charles he was a shell of himself."

http://www.fightbeat.com/article_detail.php?AT=105

pundit · Post by **pundit** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:18

From the same interview:

---------

Question: Archie, you are the only man alive who fought both Rocky Marciano and Muhammad Ali. Who do you think was the better fighter?

Moore: "I would like to say something I've been wanting to say for a long time. I thought Rocky was one of the nicest people I've ever met. They were both great in their own particular way. I think Ali was the greater fighter. I feel there will be scolding over this remark, but that's my opinion. I felt Rocky was guided closely and Wolcott was his first real test. Rocky never fought the caliber of fighters Ali fought. It wasn't his fault, they just weren't around. Rocky and Willie Pep stopped by my house after our fight. They sought me out, were glad to see me. We played pool, sat at my bar and chatted. How more sociable can you get? The champ didn't have to stop to see me. The only thing I regret is I was unable to attend Rocky's funeral. He was a great man."

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:27

I felt Rocky was guided closely and Wolcott was his first real test. Rocky never fought the caliber of fighters Ali fought.

obviousely rocky didnt fight the calibre of fighters ali fought. that doesnt mean rocky didnt fight good competition. charles, walcott, louis, moore, lastarza, layne, mathews is a solid resume.

rocky was guided carefully on the way to the top. he had to be for he went into the pros with no experience or training. weill wanted to give rocky time to get more experience and allow goldman to polish him up. sure weill avoided clarence henry and a rematch with lastarza in 1952, but marciano still be top ranked contenders joe louis, rex layne as well as other ranked contenders roland lastarza and harry kid mathews(title elimintar). rocky defintley did enough to earn his shot at the heavyweight title.

should marciano have fought a bob baker or clarence henry instead of a washed up lee savold or bernie renyolds? probably. i would have loved to see rocky especially fight henry. that would have been a great fight.
but after rocky had beaten louis, he established himself the # 1 contender and there was no need for weill to risk sending marciano in against henry or baker or satterfield and risk losing rockys high rating.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:29

"I took the fight because I was sure I could put Rocky away - and I would have if the referee hadn't of saved him. I knocked Rocky down in the second round -- I knew I had him, and I knew just how I was gonna finish him off. He got up and he put his hands on the ropes looking out, glassy-eyed. All I had to do was take two steps, clobber him, and lift the title. But the ref rushed over to him, got in front of me, chased me and got Marciano by the gloves and jerked his arms. Now what do you think that's for? To snap him out of it. He knew it. He knew I knew it. Maybe I would have kayoed him. I do not know he would have fallen again, because he was standing loose-mouthed on the ropes, gazing out at the audience. At liberty to be hit. "

well archie also said this too. this proves u cant take archie seriousely for wut he has to say. this is complete archie bullshit.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:34

no one here including me is suggesting marciano beat a prime charles. but i am concluding that marciano twice clearly beat a still very dangerous ezzard charles. i am also concluding that with both on there best nights, i would pick marciano to win by late KO.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 28 Jul 2006, 13:36

The fact that Ezzard beat Archie even once shows just how grand, glorius and wonderous a variety of aspects the universe can bestow upon the conciousness of mankind. Since it should have never happened even once...and yet it did. Just to show us all that miracles can and indeed do occur far more often that we can ever hope to imagine.

It's a sign my friends.

Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano

Re: Archie Moore: prime Charles would have beaten Marciano