BoxRec

Considering some nameless individuals undermine Archie's worth at the Heavyweight division I thought a review of his record against heavyweights is worth looking into.

The Ole Mongoose was arguably the greatest 175-pound champion in boxing history, holding that title for a decade with 14 title defenses; what's extraordinary is the fact Moore was frozen out of the 175-pound title for nearly a decade as well.

However, his first foray into the Heavyweight division was as early as 1947 against Rusty Payne (185 pounds) who was 29-8-1, easily winning a wide unaminous decision. From that time onwards Moore would have a total of 86 fights over 175-pounds until his retirement in 1963.

Considering his overall record of 186-23-10 with 132 knockouts, that's quite a large sum of fights considering he began his career at 147 pounds. That'd be more than a third of his contests, so it's ironic how one could remotely say Moore was not a capable Heavyweight or a good one.

Among the names, who Moore defeated and/or broke even with:

Willie Pastrano (draw)
Pete Rademacher (KO6)
Buddy Turman (twice, decision)
Willie Besmanoff (KO10, W19)
Charley Norkus (decision)
Howard King (6+ x's)
Bert Whitehurst (KO10, KO6)
James J. Parker (KO9)
Nino Valdes (W10, W15)
Bob Baker (KO9)
Jimmy Slade (W10)
Jimmy Bivins (4x's)
Curtis Shepherd (W10)

Among others... It also doesn't hurt that Moore kayoed Bob Satterfield who would be the #2 contender for the Heavyweight title in just a few short years either during this time period, though it was a light heavyweight bout; just four fights after Moore he'd defeat Tommy Gomez who was on a 12 fight win streak and is listed among RING MAGAZINE'S 100 GREATEST PUNCHERS.

His record at this weight is pretty extraordinary, and it's little wonder why he was so heavily favored to defeat Floyd Patterson in 1956 and when he lost many thought he took a dive. To put things into perspective, after his loss to Rocky Marciano in 1955, Moore would still reign as the 175-pound king for another six years and was still among the top fifteen (or so) heavyweights in the world when he lost to Cassius Clay in 1962.

So he was indeed a fully capable heavyweight, who just so happened to fight an all time great in Marciano, and COMPLETELY underestimated the young upstart Floyd Patterson who would be later in life considered a "near great" heavyweight who was just a shade under the top men of the 60s & 70s, and carefully avoided the absolute biggest threats in the late 50s (thought one can argue that wasn't his fault but his manager Cus D'Amato's fault).

Jesus bless!

The first encounter with Nino Valdes

Archie schooling Jimmy Slade, the same man Floyd Patterson defeated to become a ranked heavyweight.

Archie knocking out a reasonable Heavyweight opponent; Joe Louis on commentary, Archie already fought 9 times that year. First round knockout despite being outweighed by 35 pounds. This was 1951.

I am impress with the Old Moongoose's campaign at heavyweight and fought 4 World Heavyweight Champions in his career.

Archie Moore-a 5 ft 11" tall light heavyweight champion with a 42" chest and 18 " biceps.
-as Stan Lee use to say (and perhaps still does-, "Nuff Said"

What was his actual outcomes with Bivins? Split as I recall.

Moore was just extraordinary.....can't say enough good about him.

I do think the Ezzard outcomes were an anomaly, They were more evenly matched than the outcomes would depict.

Nope!!! .... They weren't

scorpio83 wrote: ↑24 Mar 2018, 04:18 I am impress with the Old Moongoose's campaign at heavyweight and fought 4 World Heavyweight Champions in his career.

Didn't beat any.

sheeyet, he was really a HW fighter fightin' "littler fellows".
by dropping weight.
He should have campaigned as a HW in the late 1940's and stayed in that division
if he really wanted to be the HW Champion of the World since he said
that was his dream since childhood.
he must have been really embarresest afterwards loosing to a "bum" like "The Rock".

Big Jimmy Slade ,I remember him ! (i think).

Nice post! Underappreciated Mongoose. Unfortunately, we don't have much in way of film during his prime. George Foreman's 'walking hook' is directly descended from Moore. Everyone should respect what this man did in the ring at the very least. Those you alluded to are pinheads.

BoxBuzz wrote: ↑24 Mar 2018, 14:03 What was his actual outcomes with Bivins? Split as I recall.

Moore was just extraordinary.....can't say enough good about him.

I do think the Ezzard outcomes were an anomaly, They were more evenly matched than the outcomes would depict.

Moore won 4, and lost 1, against Bivins.

I tend to agree with you about the Charles fights. Charles would lose to the likes of Lloyd Marshall (once; Archie went 2-0-0 against him), Jimmy Bivins (once), as well as Nino Valdes and Harold Johnson (Archie went 4-1-0 against him). I'm only accounting for mutual opponents that he and Archie shared outside of Marciano.

Its (also) understandable why Moore overlooked Patterson, too, because he previously lost to Joey Maxim whom Moore defeated three times (3-0-0).

Kalan wrote: ↑24 Mar 2018, 14:24 Nope!!! .... They weren't

Well the outcomes were all in Ezz's favor.......with one KO. But they were all competitive, and the KO almost went the other way.
And if you follow the timelines, Moore was on the rise as Ezz was heading for the end of his career.

I'm not saying Archie deserved any of the decisions, I'm just saying that there was some happenstance going on.....and Ezz would not have won 10 out of 10 as the 4 out of 4 might suggest to some. In fact, had they fought again or even four more times (based on their timlined career success curves) Moore would have certainly won any further matches had they been made.

Archie was one of a kind in terms of his ability to continue to be productive late in his career.

Circumstances and timing is everything. Buzz is right, when Archie really started taking off Ezzard was on the downside. Had the two men met four more times, it's possible that it'd of ended up 4-4 between the two. The men Ezzard was struggling against (Valdes for example) Archie was taking to school. I think that's part of the reason so many were absolutely (and pleasantly) surprised that Ezzard pulled off these two monumental battles with Marciano because prior to that he was truly "skip and miss" in terms of performance.

No matter how many times they fought, I suspect a prime Charles would have beaten Moore every time... They had 9 judges and not one judge ever thought Moore won or was winning when he was knocked out... The same way with Walcott. Not one of 6 judges thought Walcott beat Charles in their first 2 fights... But in their 3rd and 4th fight Charles couldn't get a vote... So even as Walcott was aging, Charles was getting worse.

If Charles and Moore kept fighting Moore would've started winning -- cuz in the 50's Charles' health started to fail... ALS can damage your coordination and reflexes years before it's diagnosed.. You tend to think it's aging or you need more rest.. Charles started losing the majority of his fights... Moore was several years older than Charles, but he kept winning.

..... The ALS diagnosis of Ezzard Charles was absolutely horrible... But I get so damn tired of "fans" and "historians" claiming that he had it for years and years and years, even when he fought Marciano, because.... If Stephen Hawking taught us anything it's that TIME is something you are not afforded when it comes to ALS and it's a gross lie and exaggeration for anyone to say that Charles had ALS for 15+ years when it's a rapid killer and not a slow progressing disease.

Bullcrap Homi.... How long has Stephen Hawking had ALS?? .... It eventually reduces people to basket cases like him.

Charles won 40 straight fights before he was dominated and knocked out by Joe Walcott -- a fighter Charles had BEATEN UNANIMOUSLY TWICE BEFORE.... And Charles was much younger than Walcott... Charles died of ALS -- figure it out!!!!

ALS can deteriorate your body very slowly over a period of 25 years as it did to Charles before it killed him at 53... Stephen Hawking showed us that you can survive for 50 years with ALS before it snuffs you out completely. He was diagnosed very early on -- so he knew he had the disease before most victims know it.

https://www.livescience.com/61354-steph ... vival.html

Researchers do know that the progression of the disease varies depending on the person.

Something that destroys us more slowly than an ALS case that creeps and creeps along is AGE.... We ALL get that.

.... Stephen Hawking only lived for 50 years because of technology, otherwise he'd of died within two years... That is without question a FACT

Lou Gehrig for crying out loud died in 1941, and he was diagnosed in 1939... This is NOT a slow progressing disease, it is rapid. Point blank.

It's completely fiction to say Ezzard Charles had ALS for 15+ years... Fact of the matter is he was diagnosed in 1968 and died in 1975... He was retired from boxing officially in 1959... He didn't really start having losses consistently until AFTER fighting Rocky Marciano.

Stop with the #fakenews and revisionist history kalan, it's getting old very fast. Then again, I don't expect much from a man who thinks Chris Eubank JUNIOR is among the most gifted boxers of all time.

That's total ignorant bullcrap again.... As the article states ALS effects everybody differently -- some die within a few years, some die within 40 years...

Hawking was diagnosed in 1963.... Technology wasn't that much more advanced than when Charles was diagnosed... And it isn't technology... It's an individual's resistance to the disease... You didn't read the article... so Inform yourself.

Researchers do know that the progression of the disease varies depending on the person.

Kalan wrote: ↑25 Mar 2018, 14:35 That's total ignorant bullcrap again.... As the article states ALS effects everybody differently -- some die within a few years, some die within 40 years...

Hawking was diagnosed in 1963.... Technology wasn't that much more advanced than when Charles was diagnosed... And it isn't technology... It's an individual's resistance to the disease... You didn't read the article... so Inform yourself.

From Blackpast.com: He retired from the ring in late 1956, but financial problems forced him to come out of retirement and fight two more years in 1958 and 1959. He lost 12 of his final decisions, bringing his overall record to 89 wins, 25 losses, and 1 draw. In 1966, Ezzard was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), “Lou Gehrig’s disease.” He died from the disease in 1975, shortly before his 54th birthday. He was subsequently elected to the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 1990.

Considering the lack of documentation on any latency of this disease, I find it difficult to believe he had symptoms 5 - 10 years from diagnosis. Yes, everyone is affected differently, but symptoms are prevalent throughout the lifecycle of the condition.

oogiebe wrote: ↑25 Mar 2018, 14:40

Kalan wrote: ↑25 Mar 2018, 14:35 That's total ignorant bullcrap again.... As the article states ALS effects everybody differently -- some die within a few years, some die within 40 years...

Hawking was diagnosed in 1963.... Technology wasn't that much more advanced than when Charles was diagnosed... And it isn't technology... It's an individual's resistance to the disease... You didn't read the article... so Inform yourself.

From Blackpast.com: He retired from the ring in late 1956, but financial problems forced him to come out of retirement and fight two more years in 1958 and 1959. He lost 12 of his final decisions, bringing his overall record to 89 wins, 25 losses, and 1 draw. In 1966, Ezzard was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), “Lou Gehrig’s disease.” He died from the disease in 1975, shortly before his 54th birthday. He was subsequently elected to the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 1990.

Considering the lack of documentation on any latency of this disease, I find it difficult to believe he had symptoms 5 - 10 years from diagnosis. Yes, everyone is affected differently, but symptoms are prevalent throughout the lifecycle of the condition.

In addition from ALS Association: The rate at which ALS progresses can be quite variable from one person to another. Although the mean survival time with ALS is three to five years, many people live five, 10 or more years. Symptoms can begin in the muscles that control speech and swallowing or in the hands, arms, legs or feet. Not all people with ALS experience the same symptoms or the same sequences or patterns of progression. However, progressive muscle weakness and paralysis are universally experienced.

Researchers do know that the progression of the disease varies depending on the person.

Read that and weep....

Obviously the initial progression of the disease in the body cannot be detected ... and generally speaking you only get tested and diagnosed when something gets so bad you know damned well that it cannot be tiredness, the fact that you're getting older, or whatever the Hell you've been thinking it was for the last umpteen years or so...

Look at the degeneration of Charles's career... He won 40 straight (it generally accepted that he beat Elmer Ray and was robbed blind) fights against the World's greatest fighters -- and suddenly loses to an aging rival who he beat unanimously twice before??? But now he can't get a vote from a judge fighting an older version of the same guy???

Charles complained about physical problems before the 3rd Walcott Fight... He didn't feel right... He felt slow and he didn't feel sharp... We all know that with diseases you have good days and bad days -- but the condition get steadily worse until it's diagnosed by doctors.. Since ALS can be destroying your body for 50 years or more -- and Charles got to the point at a young age where he couldn't beat ANYBODY... Since he DIED from ALS at the young age of 53 that HAS to be the answer.

He was so brilliant in the late 40's that it was ridiculous.

Kalan wrote: ↑25 Mar 2018, 15:04

Researchers do know that the progression of the disease varies depending on the person.

Read that and weep....

Obviously the initial progression of the disease in the body cannot be detected ... and generally speaking you only get tested and diagnosed when something gets so bad you know damned well that it cannot be tiredness, the fact that you're getting older, or whatever the Hell you've been thinking it was for the last umpteen years or so...

Look at the degeneration of Charles's career... He won 40 straight (it generally accepted that he beat Elmer Ray and was robbed blind) fights against the World's greatest fighters -- and suddenly loses to an aging rival who he beat unanimously twice before??? But now he can't get a vote from a judge fighting an older version of the same guy???

Charles complained about physical problems before the 3rd Walcott Fight... He didn't feel right... He felt slow and he didn't feel sharp... We all know that with diseases you have good days and bad days -- but the condition get steadily worse until it's diagnosed by doctors.. Since ALS can be destroying your body for 50 years or more -- and Charles got to the point at a young age where he couldn't beat ANYBODY... Since he DIED from ALS at the young age of 53 that HAS to be the answer.

He was so brilliant in the late 40's that it was ridiculous.

Yes, it's in my post. Read the whole thing. I'm not arguing with you, I'm providing some facts.

Right... I'm glad you're so interested...

But you did say "Considering the lack of documentation on any latency of this disease, I find it difficult to believe he had symptoms 5 - 10 years from diagnosis. Yes, everyone is affected differently, but symptoms are prevalent throughout the lifecycle of the condition."

Right... But the initial symptoms may be so mild that they might only dent your athletic prowess by 2 to 10%... You might think you over trained or are over tired or are just not feeling right.... You might put it down to aging... You can still beat the majority of guys you're fighting... As Charles lost more and more fights he attributed it to aging more rapidly than many of his competitors... People do age at differing rates - or he attributed it a cold or the flu or whatever.. He didn't realize he had something super serious until he couldn't to basic life tasks.

That's true of some people who get ALS because it can doddle along for years before it gets debilitating.