Ending The Moore and Walcott myth once and for all

[SuzieQ49]

im sick and tired of hearing bull**** after bull**** "walcott and moore were washed up old men when marciano beat them "


fact is marciano detractors make the mistake of lumping charles, walcott, moore, louis together as old washed up men. this is a mistake because u have to look at each of there careers differently.



anyway this is the best mythbuster on marciano i have ever read. it was written by ted spoon






"It's not differcult to spot a remark difference in the physical capabilities of Joe louis in '51, but I'd like to know when 'Jersey' Joe or Archie Moore (despite the latter being overmatched) looked fresher, more capable.

There are no laws in boxing opinions, nor is there such an entity who could be logically labelled an 'expert', but casual fans will eat what they're fed, alas myths are recycled for another generation.

If all one hears is Walcott was old then feeling inclined to agree will take its toll like almost an infectious obligation, Ted Spoon has received the same vibe off of both writers, no surprise.

Numerical factors matter only if they prove a factor. I'll be damned if it was age that beat Walcott during that heated battle in Chicago; arguably, probably the best fight the usually negative Walcott fought.

Archie Moore fought one of the most intense defensive fight's you may lay your sceptical eyes on. Again, where are these signs of 'ageing'?"








now that all of you marciano detractors have been owned, lets put an end to this thread and to the marciano myth that walcott and moore were old washed up men. thank you.

[tommyhearns804]

Lol what a idiot you people are.If Ali was past his prime at 30 then why and how could Moore who was 45 when he fought Marciano and Walcott had to be around 38 or 39 be considered in their primes?Then this moron says some writer said they were still in their primes?Get the **** out of here with that bull****.Of course some white writer will say they were in their primes to make it look like Marciano fought fighters who weren't washed up.
In any case even if Moore was in this 20's and was in the prime of his life the man still had a glass chin.No fighter who ever had a title in any weight class was knocked down as many times as Moore.Go to boxrec.com Moore was knocked out in his prime by other middleweights much easier than Marciano knocked him out.Charley Burley a middleweight knocked Moore down at least 4 times and toyed with him like a child never being hurt like Marciano was .
Moore had over 200 fights by the time he fought Marciano so his body was worned down.He had been knocked out and down countless times as i said.Walcott was knocked out at least 5 times before he faced Marciano.Walcott was 2 and 2 in his last 4 fights before he was facing Marciano.No all of the sudden he faces Marciano and he is this young strong unbeatable force?Yeah only in Marciano nutt huggers dreams.
Again if Ali is past his prime at 30 then both of these guys were waaaaay past their primes.Even in his prime Walcott was a joke.And more was alot better as a middleweight and even then he had a glass chin.Hey Suzie Q instead of typing about a sport you have no clue of maybe you should do what you were put here to do and that is drop to your knees and please men.

[Kid Achilles]

Once again, Tommyhearns proves himself to be an idiot with an odd fetish for **********ism.

[Heckler]

I do agree, Walcott fought the fight of his life.. Archie obviously wasn't in his physical prime, but was a seasoned light heavy and still a formidable opponent. Joe Louis? I dont take that fight into account for obvious reasons.

[RockyMarcianofan00]

Walcott was prime

Moore not really at his absolute prime but definitely still a top notch fighter

[SuzieQ49]

actually archie was in his prime. take a look at his record prior to fighting marciano. he was 45-1 in his last 46 fights. after the marciano fight, moore went 28-2

archie moore was unquestionably at/near his prime vs marciano.


archie moore was a fighter who got better with age


i have film of archie moore in 1940s and let me tell u something, archie moore looks just as good if not better in the early-mid 1950s than he does in 1946-47. hes just as fast execpt better defense and smarter and more experienced.

archie had a long prime 1947-56

Moore who was 45 when he fought Marciano

moore was 38

[SABBATH]

Once again, Tommyhearns proves himself to be an idiot with an odd fetish for **********ism.

Don't discourage him. He keeps the comical element alive on these threads. tommyhearns804 provides the perfect blend of ******ity and humour. Like a zoo monkey that slams his head against his cage before eating his own ****.

[King Koyle]

Don't discourage him. He keeps the comical element alive on these threads. tommyhearns804 provides the perfect blend of ******ity and humour. Like a zoo monkey that slams his head against his cage before eating his own ****.

LOL,thats true!I don't even know what he wrote,but im sure it's his usual trademark ******ity.

[butterfly1964]

actually archie was in his prime. take a look at his record prior to fighting marciano. he was 45-1 in his last 46 fights. after the marciano fight, moore went 28-2

archie moore was unquestionably at/near his prime vs marciano.


archie moore was a fighter who got better with age


i have film of archie moore in 1940s and let me tell u something, archie moore looks just as good if not better in the early-mid 1950s than he does in 1946-47. hes just as fast execpt better defense and smarter and more experienced.

archie had a long prime 1947-56








moore was 38

who's prime at 42, lol!

[RockyMarcianofan00]

totally remote for the most part to this topic but

Archie Moore has got to be one of the Most underrated fighters ever3
He had to wait 17 years to get a shot at the title, some fighters don't even fight that long. He won it too. He was probably won of the greatest Light Heavyweights to ever live and a very good heavyweight.

He was a journeyman, he's probably the only fighter to have fought from James J. Braddock's time (though he was LHW at the time) all the way to Muhammad Ali's time.

he went
W 187 (132 ko's) | L 23 | D 11 | Total 222

Doesn't seem to impressive until you relize that he boxed for over 30 years, all he needed to do was lose once a year, missing 7 years to rack up them losses.
He also has more KO's then any boxer in history - anyweight class
132 KO'S - thats insane, he's knocked out more people then most fighters have fights. think about it most fighters don't even have 132 fights and yet Archie Moore Ko'd 132.

Archie Moore was a great fighter
[IMG]//i24.***********.com/albums/c49/IrishInsomniac00/other%20boxing%20pictures/thArchie-Moore--C10104813.jpg[/IMG]

Fought 1935-1963
His last fight was after Muhammad Ali. It was against Mike DiBiase (who was 0-0-0) and he was 47.
Only guy i know of who fought later was George Foreman (49)