i was searching through his record trying to see who was the best opponent he beat before he fought liston. ill be dammed if 45 year old archie moore didnt come # 1 on my list. that old man, he was still a damm good fighter in 1962. in 1962 he was rated in the top 10, and had recentley knocked out # 4 ranked 6'3 215lb alejandro lavorante unconsious in the 10th round. lavorante had to be carried out in a stretcher. doug jones was a very good opponent, henry cooper was good. but i still think archie moore in 1962 was perhaps the best opponent ali beat. my second choice would be henry cooper or doug jones. that ol mongoose incredible battle worn and very old in 1962 was still a good fighter. if u watch the film of moore-clay he was still a solid fighter. clay just presented a horrible style matchup for him which is why clay dominated moore much easier than he did jones.
so who was clays best pre title opponent? my pick is archie moore
cassius clay's best opponent pre title
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Moore always had trouble with faster fighters, thats why Ezzard Charles gave him so much trouble... I'd say the best fighter Ali fought pre Liston was Jones though... Moore was the greater fighter P4P but Jones at that time had the better ability... a bout between Jones and Moore round about that time would have been interesting...
Has anyone seen the fight with sonny banks? That guy had hands far faster than Clay, and knocked him down! He made Clay need to be a bit of a sort of counterpuncher and pick his punches carefully, rather than just asserting his rhythm and dominating his opponent like clay always did. I was very surprised when i watched this fight.
My pick is still Moore all the same though
My pick is still Moore all the same though
Yeah I have the Banks fight too... he wasnt quite as good as Jones but still gave Ali a good fight...mattym wrote:Has anyone seen the fight with sonny banks? That guy had hands far faster than Clay, and knocked him down! He made Clay need to be a bit of a sort of counterpuncher and pick his punches carefully, rather than just asserting his rhythm and dominating his opponent like clay always did. I was very surprised when i watched this fight.
My pick is still Moore all the same though
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
On paper it was Moore. The bout was even billed as a 12 round eliminator for the world heavyweight title.
Moore was 'up' for the fight and even had a nice quip when Ali announced he was cutting Archie's demise from round 8 to round 4 with the line "Moore in four!". Archie replied "Moore may indeed fall in 4. But it will be over the prostrate form of Mr Clay!"
However, when it came to the actual fight, it was all Ali. He was far too fast of both hand and foot for Archie to be able to put anything meaningful together. For every punch Archie landed he got 20 back for his troubles. In the first couple of rounds Ali was just hitting him with arm punches but in the third he got down to business and Moore was starting to get hurt.
Archie's corner gave him smelling salts before he came out for round 4 and Archie tried to take the fight to Ali in what looked to be a last gasp effort to turn the tide. Unfortunately he just ran into some vicious punches from Ali and was quickly on the deck 3 times before it was waved off.
Ali had some nice things to say about Moore after the bout including saying Archie had been his idol.
But at the end of the day Ali had proven that his doggerel was true:
"I'll sweep that old man right out of the ring,
For a good new broom sweeps up any old thing."
Moore was 'up' for the fight and even had a nice quip when Ali announced he was cutting Archie's demise from round 8 to round 4 with the line "Moore in four!". Archie replied "Moore may indeed fall in 4. But it will be over the prostrate form of Mr Clay!"
However, when it came to the actual fight, it was all Ali. He was far too fast of both hand and foot for Archie to be able to put anything meaningful together. For every punch Archie landed he got 20 back for his troubles. In the first couple of rounds Ali was just hitting him with arm punches but in the third he got down to business and Moore was starting to get hurt.
Archie's corner gave him smelling salts before he came out for round 4 and Archie tried to take the fight to Ali in what looked to be a last gasp effort to turn the tide. Unfortunately he just ran into some vicious punches from Ali and was quickly on the deck 3 times before it was waved off.
Ali had some nice things to say about Moore after the bout including saying Archie had been his idol.
But at the end of the day Ali had proven that his doggerel was true:
"I'll sweep that old man right out of the ring,
For a good new broom sweeps up any old thing."
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
In my opinion, Ali's best opponents before he fought for the title, are the following men, in this order:
1.) Doug Jones
2.) Henry Cooper
3.) Archie Moore*
4.) Charlie Powell
5.) Lamar Clark**
6.) Willi Besmanoff
7.) Zbigniew Pietrzyskowski***
*Archie Moore may have been passed his best, but even after he lost to both Marciano and Patterson in 55 and 56, Moore held on to his Light Heavyweight crown for another decade, and from in 1961 he had beaten such men as Pete Rademacher, Willie Pastrano, Guilio Rinaldi, Howard King and Alejandro Lavorante before meeting with Ali.
**Lamar Clark was Ali's first real solid test, being 47-2-1, facing off with a 5-0 Ali. Clark had never really faced any quality opponents, but his knock out power was a gimme, and many believed he had an excellent chance at beating the Olympian Clay.
***I know this was an amateur fight in the Olympics, but Ali had tremendous problems with the Polish boxer with well over 230 bouts under his belt. Ali won the decision, and he wouldn't face another south-paw until 1966 against Karl Mildenberger, whom Ali had trouble with.
I ranked Jones as #1, because I have watched the fight a few times, and Ali did not make good on his prediction in knocking Jones out, and in my opinion Jones landed the more crisper punches and there were many at ringside who felt that Jones genuinely won the fight, and Jones was much smaller and lighter than Ali was.
1.) Doug Jones
2.) Henry Cooper
3.) Archie Moore*
4.) Charlie Powell
5.) Lamar Clark**
6.) Willi Besmanoff
7.) Zbigniew Pietrzyskowski***
*Archie Moore may have been passed his best, but even after he lost to both Marciano and Patterson in 55 and 56, Moore held on to his Light Heavyweight crown for another decade, and from in 1961 he had beaten such men as Pete Rademacher, Willie Pastrano, Guilio Rinaldi, Howard King and Alejandro Lavorante before meeting with Ali.
**Lamar Clark was Ali's first real solid test, being 47-2-1, facing off with a 5-0 Ali. Clark had never really faced any quality opponents, but his knock out power was a gimme, and many believed he had an excellent chance at beating the Olympian Clay.
***I know this was an amateur fight in the Olympics, but Ali had tremendous problems with the Polish boxer with well over 230 bouts under his belt. Ali won the decision, and he wouldn't face another south-paw until 1966 against Karl Mildenberger, whom Ali had trouble with.
I ranked Jones as #1, because I have watched the fight a few times, and Ali did not make good on his prediction in knocking Jones out, and in my opinion Jones landed the more crisper punches and there were many at ringside who felt that Jones genuinely won the fight, and Jones was much smaller and lighter than Ali was.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
1.) Doug Jones
2.) Henry Cooper
3.) Archie Moore*
4.) Charlie Powell
5.) Lamar Clark**
6.) Willi Besmanoff
7.) Zbigniew Pietrzyskowski***
lamar clark? he was a bum! hahahahah willie besmanoff?
who the fornicate is # 7???
isnt he an amatuer? heres my list
1. old archie moore
2. Doug Jones
3. Henry Cooper
4. Alejandro Lavorante
5. Alex Miteff
5. Billy Daniels
ALL RANKED WORLD CLASS FIGHTERS
Re: Ali's Best Pre-Title Opponents
I would say that Doug Jones and Henry Cooper were
Muhammad Ali's best opponents before "The Greatest"
won the world heavyweight title. Archie Moore was too
old by the time he fought Ali. I would pick Jones over
Cooper.
- Chuck Johnston
Muhammad Ali's best opponents before "The Greatest"
won the world heavyweight title. Archie Moore was too
old by the time he fought Ali. I would pick Jones over
Cooper.
- Chuck Johnston
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
Jones was obviously the best, it isn't even close. I would add Billy Daniels who was a undefeated going into the fight, fought a decent fight against Clay (Ali), although he was pretty inconsistent after it. As mentioned the Moore fight was a complete mismatch.
1.Jones
2.Cooper
3. Daniels
4.Banks
5.Miteff
1.Jones
2.Cooper
3. Daniels
4.Banks
5.Miteff
-
The Great John L
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4351
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 19:37
Reading this thread should make anyone realize just how much more important his post layoff career is to the Ali legacy. His pre title competition was pretty weak, which is why he was such a bi under dog to the big bear. Even after his two wins over Liston, his competition really wouldn’t make him standout until his comeback. Not to say that the pre layoff competition was bad, just that besides Liston and an injured Patterson, it wasn’t particularly noteworthy. Kind of like Dempsey’s title defenses. (oops)
But then the second career really established Ali as… well, the Greatest. Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Quarry, Shavers, Lyle, Bonavena, Ellis, Bugner, Young, etc. What a list. Try putting those in order.
But then the second career really established Ali as… well, the Greatest. Frazier, Norton, Foreman, Quarry, Shavers, Lyle, Bonavena, Ellis, Bugner, Young, etc. What a list. Try putting those in order.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Re: Ali's Best Pre-Title Opponents
chuck u say too old, but archie was still a good fighter in 1962. he recentley knocked out # 4 ranked alejandro lavorante out cold. the same lavorante who knocked out zora folley.Chuck1052 wrote:I would say that Doug Jones and Henry Cooper were
Muhammad Ali's best opponents before "The Greatest"
won the world heavyweight title. Archie Moore was too
old by the time he fought Ali. I would pick Jones over
Cooper.
- Chuck Johnston
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
ur horribly underating moore here. even in 1962, he was still far better than banks, daniels, miteff. moore simply didnt match up well vs ali. but i would still pick the 1962 archie over everyone on ur list.Ambling Alp wrote:Jones was obviously the best, it isn't even close. I would add Billy Daniels who was a undefeated going into the fight, fought a decent fight against Clay (Ali), although he was pretty inconsistent after it. As mentioned the Moore fight was a complete mismatch.
1.Jones
2.Cooper
3. Daniels
4.Banks
5.Miteff
also alp i see u left off alejandro lavorante. he knocked our ur boy a prime zora folley. surely this is one of alis best wins?
Last edited by BrocktonBlockbuster49 on 09 Aug 2006, 10:21, edited 1 time in total.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Decagon wrote:1. Jones
2. Cooper
3. Banks
4. (tie) Miteff
4. (tie) Moore
6. Johnson
banks over archie moore? thats ridiculous
alonzo johnson but no alejandro lavorante? did u know that lavorante shutout alonzo johnson. thats right he won ever single won of there 10 rounds when they fought. yet johnson over lavorante?
where alejandro lavorante? he was a top 5 contender in the world and he knocked out a prime zora folley.
u guys are overating sonny banks cause he floored ali. but he wasnt that good. he wasnt even a ranked contender
Last edited by BrocktonBlockbuster49 on 09 Aug 2006, 10:25, edited 1 time in total.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Decagon wrote:I think that at this point, everyone's deliberately underranking Moore just to piss your drunken ass off.
im not talking about moore. im talking about alejandro lavorante. everyones forgetting about him. but he was by far one of the best fighters ali beat pre title. u even ranked alonzo johnson over him and lavorante shutout johnson.
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
I only added Lamar Clark because he damn near had 50 bouts to Ali's 5 bouts, and though Clark never fought a real series of fighters, he had tremendous power, it was Ali's first test against a puncher, though a limited one. Ali wouldn't face another puncher-type fighter until he met up with Charlie Powell and then later Liston.
I mentioned Besmanoff because he had faced alot of contenders and other note worthy fighters, though he often failed to beat them, so Besmanoff was a good test for the young Ali, as the man had plenty of experience against top flight opposition.
And I already said that #7 was an amateur, but you said his greatest opponents BEFORE winning the title, so I threw in this finalist in the Olympics, whom Ali had tremendous trouble with, but managed to win over. I would say the Pole was alot more better than some of Ali's opponents early on, certainly better than Tunny Hunsaker.
And I think everyone is seriously under-rating both Jones and Cooper, both fights Ali had with Cooper were close, but Cooper always got busted up beyond repair. And you have to think, if Angello Dundee never split the glove open wider, we may never have known Muhammad Ali, as Henry Cooper would have changed the course of history.
"THESE GLOVES DID NOT SPLIT!"- a marker under Henry Cooper's gloves in a pub in London, England.
I mentioned Besmanoff because he had faced alot of contenders and other note worthy fighters, though he often failed to beat them, so Besmanoff was a good test for the young Ali, as the man had plenty of experience against top flight opposition.
And I already said that #7 was an amateur, but you said his greatest opponents BEFORE winning the title, so I threw in this finalist in the Olympics, whom Ali had tremendous trouble with, but managed to win over. I would say the Pole was alot more better than some of Ali's opponents early on, certainly better than Tunny Hunsaker.
And I think everyone is seriously under-rating both Jones and Cooper, both fights Ali had with Cooper were close, but Cooper always got busted up beyond repair. And you have to think, if Angello Dundee never split the glove open wider, we may never have known Muhammad Ali, as Henry Cooper would have changed the course of history.
"THESE GLOVES DID NOT SPLIT!"- a marker under Henry Cooper's gloves in a pub in London, England.
-
computerrank
- Editor
- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
BoxRec Annual Ratings say Cooper was his best pre belt fight opponent - Cooper was at 1672 points before the bout.
1963-06-18 1797.2 1672.1 W TKO Muhammad Ali vs. Henry Cooper
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/B ... ght--1960s
1963-06-18 1797.2 1672.1 W TKO Muhammad Ali vs. Henry Cooper
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/B ... ght--1960s
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:ur horribly underating moore here. even in 1962, he was still far better than banks, daniels, miteff. moore simply didnt match up well vs ali. but i would still pick the 1962 archie over everyone on ur list.Ambling Alp wrote:Jones was obviously the best, it isn't even close. I would add Billy Daniels who was a undefeated going into the fight, fought a decent fight against Clay (Ali), although he was pretty inconsistent after it. As mentioned the Moore fight was a complete mismatch.
1.Jones
2.Cooper
3. Daniels
4.Banks
5.Miteff
I believe ur horribly overrating Moore :) . Moore performed embarrasingly bad against Ali; it wasn't just a style problem, and he wisely retired soon after.
Banks, Daniels and Miteff atleast put up some credible opposition. If Moore was better than these guys than he could have proved it by beating them.
To say that Moore was better than doug Jones at this point is laughable.
I left Lavarante off because he simply wasn't that good. His only noteworthy win at all was the one over Folley (who btw isn't "my boy"). He was only 19-5, and was even knocked out by journeyman John Riggins. (Not the football player :)
He never should have been ranked. These kind of things happen. Michael Grant was the #1 contender at one time.
If a fighter has beaten only one good fighter in an otherwise ordinary career career he shouldn't be considered good. This is why we don't think of Marty Marshall (who beat Liston) or Willie Meehan (who beat Dempsey) as greats.
I am a huge fan of Ali, but I'm not going to rate undeserving opponents highly so that Ali looks better.
Beating Moore or a mediocre fighter like Lavorante simply wasn't a big deal at all.
also alp i see u left off alejandro lavorante. he knocked our ur boy a prime zora folley. surely this is one of alis best wins?
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
it was mainly due to a style problem. moore was still one of the 10 best HWs in the world
I believe ur horribly overrating Moore . Moore performed embarrasingly bad against Ali; it wasn't just a style problem,
Banks, Daniels and Miteff atleast put up some credible opposition. If Moore was better than these guys than he could have proved it by beating them.
miteff was knocked out in 6 easy rounds. miteff never beat anyone big of note(please dont say shot version of bob baker). alejandro lavorante's win over zora folley exceeds any win miteff has.
daniels was undefeated but he had a padded record. he had no wins over a credible contender. daniels ended up finishing 23-22! yet u record this as one of alis best pre title opponents? daniels was not even ranked in the top 10.
banks? he was just a journeyman/prospect. nothing more. he was a never a contender. ali dominated him outside of the knockdown. banks lost every time he stepped up in competition. he even lost to 1-2 bum joe shelton and 2-5 tomato can chuck garrett. u think a 1962 moore would lose to bums like that? u think banks was better than a 1962 moore? i beg to differ.
so it seems ur picking guys based on there preformance vs ali which is the wrong way to go. sure bob pastor did much better vs joe louis than max baer. does that make pastor better than baer?
why? archie had a lot of experience and a lot of punching power. he would be a dangerous fight for jones. archie had slowed down a lot but he was still a skilled dangerous fighter. he could defintley knock jones out in 62.
To say that Moore was better than doug Jones at this point is laughable.
alis management said "he looked like a milion bucks in stopping lavorante. we figured he was ready to fight archie moore." it seems they defintley thought more of the 1962 moore than u did. notice how they had already threw ali in vs guys like banks and daniels. they werent gonna send clay in vs moore until they knew clay was ready.
o but u include sonny banks who lost to lost to 1-2 bum joe shelton and 2-5 tomato can chuck garrett?
I left Lavarante off because he simply wasn't that good. His only noteworthy win at all was the one over Folley (who btw isn't "my boy"). He was only 19-5, and was even knocked out by journeyman John Riggins. (Not the football player
alejandro lavorante was a dangerous big 6'4 210lb hard hitting argentinian. he was ranked # 4 in the world and for good reason. he knocked out a prime zora folley. this is a better win than banks or daniels ever got. in fact neither banks or daniels was ever in the top 10!
lavorante also shutout alonzo johnson, who gave muhammad ali a hard fought 10 round fight. lavorante is by far one of alis best pre title wins. his resume clearly shows this. he was big, powerful, dangerous, ranked in the top 10, and had knocked out a very good fighter in zora folley.
He never should have been ranked. These kind of things happen. Michael Grant was the #1 contender at one time.
so knocking out a top ranked contender like zora folley doesnt deserve to get u ranked?
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
Miteff was knocked out in 6 easy rounds; well Moore was knocked out in only 4 easy rounds.
Miteff never beat anyone of note, and you say "please don't say a shot version of Bob Baker" Well I wasn't going to say Bob Baker because Baker never fought Miteff.
For what its worth, Miteff did beat Alonzo Johnson and Nino Valdes, both of whom you seem to be impressed with for some reason.
Brockton, you yourself referred to Miteff as a :ranked world class fighter". :)
As for Billy Daniels you said he wasn't even a ranked fighter. well, he was when he fought Clay, and you said so yourself in an earlier post. :) Do you even read your own posts?
It's true that Daniels career was a disapointment. . To some extent that can be attributed to bad management; he was really thrown to the wolves. He fought very competition after the Clay fight.
However, at the time of Daniels-Clay fight, Daniels was a pretty good fighter. Clay was the first fighter to beat him. After he lost to Clay, in Daniels very next fight he beat Mike DeJohn, who you once called an "Incredible Man".
You say that I seem to be picking guys on their performance against Ali, which you say is the wrong way to go. Well, how well these guys pefromed when they fought Ali has to be a major factor when rating how good fighers were when they fought Ali. I do agree that it's not the only factor.
You say that Ali's management must have thought that Moore was more dangerous than Daniels or Banks becasue they had him fight those guys before he was ready for Moore. Well using that logic, they must have thought that Charley Powell was better than Moore Ali fought after he fought Moore. :)
A fighter can't always fight the opponent that he wants when he wants to. sometimes the guy he wants to fight is already obliged to fight someone else.
You can say that Moore would ko Miteff in 8 and Moore would Ko Banks in 6 and Moore would Daniels in 9, but guess what, it never happened. Archie never got around to fighting these guys although he managed to find the time to fight journeyman Howard King 5 times!!
You mock Willie Besmmanhoff and I agree that he was nothing special at all. However he gave Archie a lot of trouble.
Archie couldn't ko the legendary Buddy Truman in two fights.
Archie could only get a draw against Willie Pastrano in the fight before he fought Clay. Archie clearly wasn't a legitimate top 10 heavyweight by 1962.
I'm very skeptical that Moore would beat Miteff, Banks,Daniels in 1962, much less knock them all out.
I'm not saying that Miteff, Daniels, or Banks were all time greats or anything like that. And I guess I can understand why someone would think Moore even at his age was better than them, even if I don't agree with it.
However, to think that Moore was better than Doug Jones at this time is absurd. Jones was one of the top 4 or 5 heavyweights in the world at the time. He fought a great fight against Clay even though he lost. (Ring Magazine named it the Fight of the Year).
As for Lavorante, yes he beat Alonzo Johnson, who as you mentoned went the distance with Clay. however this was only Clay's 8th fight. Johnson was one of the worst fighters Ali ever fought. His record is horrible. That Alonzo Johnson was the 2nd best fighter that Lavorante ever beat indicates that Lavorante wasn't that good.
You ask if Lavorante deserve to be ranked after he beat Folley? Well, it's not that suprising that he got ranked after that. (Though#4 seems surprisngly high, he had two losses already)However, after that he proved he wasn't for real. He got knocked out by Moore, Ali and a tomato can named John Riggins.
You are always quick to point out Lavorant's one big win, but if you don't consider that to be a fluke, than you can't considerr his humilating knockout loss to to John Riggins as a fluke either.
Do you really think that Lavorante was really the 4th best challenger for the heavyweight title in 1961?
He was ranked ahead of Ingemar Johannson, Cleveland Williams, Henry Cooper, and Clay himself. With the benefit of hindsight, we can tell that they were all much better and that the odds are that each of them would have knocked him out easily. Beating Lavorante simply wasn't a big deal.
It's pretty obvious that the reason you are trying to puff up Lavorante is so that you can make Moore look better.
Miteff never beat anyone of note, and you say "please don't say a shot version of Bob Baker" Well I wasn't going to say Bob Baker because Baker never fought Miteff.
For what its worth, Miteff did beat Alonzo Johnson and Nino Valdes, both of whom you seem to be impressed with for some reason.
Brockton, you yourself referred to Miteff as a :ranked world class fighter". :)
As for Billy Daniels you said he wasn't even a ranked fighter. well, he was when he fought Clay, and you said so yourself in an earlier post. :) Do you even read your own posts?
It's true that Daniels career was a disapointment. . To some extent that can be attributed to bad management; he was really thrown to the wolves. He fought very competition after the Clay fight.
However, at the time of Daniels-Clay fight, Daniels was a pretty good fighter. Clay was the first fighter to beat him. After he lost to Clay, in Daniels very next fight he beat Mike DeJohn, who you once called an "Incredible Man".
You say that I seem to be picking guys on their performance against Ali, which you say is the wrong way to go. Well, how well these guys pefromed when they fought Ali has to be a major factor when rating how good fighers were when they fought Ali. I do agree that it's not the only factor.
You say that Ali's management must have thought that Moore was more dangerous than Daniels or Banks becasue they had him fight those guys before he was ready for Moore. Well using that logic, they must have thought that Charley Powell was better than Moore Ali fought after he fought Moore. :)
A fighter can't always fight the opponent that he wants when he wants to. sometimes the guy he wants to fight is already obliged to fight someone else.
You can say that Moore would ko Miteff in 8 and Moore would Ko Banks in 6 and Moore would Daniels in 9, but guess what, it never happened. Archie never got around to fighting these guys although he managed to find the time to fight journeyman Howard King 5 times!!
You mock Willie Besmmanhoff and I agree that he was nothing special at all. However he gave Archie a lot of trouble.
Archie couldn't ko the legendary Buddy Truman in two fights.
Archie could only get a draw against Willie Pastrano in the fight before he fought Clay. Archie clearly wasn't a legitimate top 10 heavyweight by 1962.
I'm very skeptical that Moore would beat Miteff, Banks,Daniels in 1962, much less knock them all out.
I'm not saying that Miteff, Daniels, or Banks were all time greats or anything like that. And I guess I can understand why someone would think Moore even at his age was better than them, even if I don't agree with it.
However, to think that Moore was better than Doug Jones at this time is absurd. Jones was one of the top 4 or 5 heavyweights in the world at the time. He fought a great fight against Clay even though he lost. (Ring Magazine named it the Fight of the Year).
As for Lavorante, yes he beat Alonzo Johnson, who as you mentoned went the distance with Clay. however this was only Clay's 8th fight. Johnson was one of the worst fighters Ali ever fought. His record is horrible. That Alonzo Johnson was the 2nd best fighter that Lavorante ever beat indicates that Lavorante wasn't that good.
You ask if Lavorante deserve to be ranked after he beat Folley? Well, it's not that suprising that he got ranked after that. (Though#4 seems surprisngly high, he had two losses already)However, after that he proved he wasn't for real. He got knocked out by Moore, Ali and a tomato can named John Riggins.
You are always quick to point out Lavorant's one big win, but if you don't consider that to be a fluke, than you can't considerr his humilating knockout loss to to John Riggins as a fluke either.
Do you really think that Lavorante was really the 4th best challenger for the heavyweight title in 1961?
He was ranked ahead of Ingemar Johannson, Cleveland Williams, Henry Cooper, and Clay himself. With the benefit of hindsight, we can tell that they were all much better and that the odds are that each of them would have knocked him out easily. Beating Lavorante simply wasn't a big deal.
It's pretty obvious that the reason you are trying to puff up Lavorante is so that you can make Moore look better.