Greatest Fighters over 40 years old...

[Britkid]

The fact that Pep & SRR, in some people's eyes the 2 best of all time, had to fight on so long was a true shame. I don't consider either man great in their 40s, the only fighters I think get that are

Archie Moore
Bernard Hopkins
George Foreman

I don't think you can give it to guys who were great still being able to beat weaker opposition like Holyfield, Holmes, SRR. Don't know enough about Fitzsimmons to judge

There was IMO only one great fighter at the age of 40+ and his name was Moore, Archie Moore.

Hopkins has shown himself a clear second.

Foreman is vying for third place, and personally I agree with you, he is.

But Robinson is floating around Foreman as he did beat a couple of contenders aged 40+, hell Holmes is up their purely on the strength of the Mercer win and McCall performance and Fitzy for beating Gardner and by Newspaper decision, O'Brien. But all this shows, is that outside Moore and to a point Hopkins, how weak a full top ten list is.....

[DaxxKahn]

The fact that Pep & SRR, in some people's eyes the 2 best of all time, had to fight on so long was a true shame. I don't consider either man great in their 40s, the only fighters I think get that are

Archie Moore
Bernard Hopkins
George Foreman

I don't think you can give it to guys who were great still being able to beat weaker opposition like Holyfield, Holmes, SRR. Don't know enough about Fitzsimmons to judge

There was IMO only one great fighter at the age of 40+ and his name was Moore, Archie Moore.

Hopkins has shown himself a clear second.

Foreman is vying for third place, and personally I agree with you, he is.

But Robinson is floating around Foreman as he did beat a couple of contenders aged 40+, hell Holmes is up their purely on the strength of the Mercer win and McCall performance and Fitzy for beating Gardner and by Newspaper decision, O'Brien. But all this shows, is that outside Moore and to a point Hopkins, how weak a full top ten list is.....

I pretty much go with the three mentioned

Moore
Hopkins
Foreman

as legit fighters who were/are dangerous past 40 for anyone. The rest get credit for being competitive with younger fighters no for their net worth as fighters

[Kev]

Shane Mosely is getting close to this club imo and Antonio Tarver deserves a mention along with Glen Johnson of course, both winning titles at 40 I believe.

I'm not that clued up on Archie Moore so I may be wrong here but isn't a lot of the reason he's considered so far ahead of everyone else in some part down to nostalgia?

I mean against the elite he got knocked out, Ali, Patterson, Marciano all ko'd him whilst Hopkins has not only been highly competitive with the current elite at plus 40 years of age but he's beaten and completely schooled some of them.

In an absolute sense you'd have to think that a 44 year old B Hop would have too much for a 44 year old Archie.

It should also be noted of course that Archie was able to do what is apparently impossible and that is come down in weight sometimes dropping 20 or 30 lbs and winning against top opposition like Yvonne Durell, another catchweight fight I do believe

[DaxxKahn]

Shane Mosely is getting close to this club imo and Antonio Tarver deserves a mention along with Glen Johnson of course, both winning titles at 40 I believe.

I'm not that clued up on Archie Moore so I may be wrong here but isn't a lot of the reason he's considered so far ahead of everyone else in some part down to nostalgia?

I mean against the elite he got knocked out, Ali, Patterson, Marciano all ko'd him whilst Hopkins has not only been highly competitive with the current elite at plus 40 years of age but he's beaten and completely schooled some of them.

In an absolute sense you'd have to think that a 44 year old B Hop would have too much for a 44 year old Archie.

It should also be noted of course that Archie was able to do what is apparently impossible and that is come down in weight sometimes dropping 20 or 30 lbs and winning against top opposition like Yvonne Durell, another catchweight fight I do believe

Johnson is a good choice forgot all about him...He was only 35 when he was champ though

[Britkid]

Shane Mosely is getting close to this club imo and Antonio Tarver deserves a mention along with Glen Johnson of course, both winning titles at 40 I believe.

I'm not that clued up on Archie Moore so I may be wrong here but isn't a lot of the reason he's considered so far ahead of everyone else in some part down to nostalgia?

I mean against the elite he got knocked out, Ali, Patterson, Marciano all ko'd him whilst Hopkins has not only been highly competitive with the current elite at plus 40 years of age but he's beaten and completely schooled some of them.

In an absolute sense you'd have to think that a 44 year old B Hop would have too much for a 44 year old Archie.

It should also be noted of course that Archie was able to do what is apparently impossible and that is come down in weight sometimes dropping 20 or 30 lbs and winning against top opposition like Yvonne Durell, another catchweight fight I do believe

Against Durelle; Moore had to boil down to 175 and yet despite being floored four times (three times in the first) still managed as a 40+ title holder, to defend his crown, winning a rematch in three one sided rounds.

For what it was worth; no one could ever beat Moore at 175 from 1956 when Moore turned 40 officially (some believe it was as early as 1951, that Moore turned 40), until Moore retired as undefeated Light Heavyweight World Champion.

[ElTerribleMorales]

Duran was how old when he beat Barkley?

[ICB]

Duran was how old when he beat Barkley?

37 i think.

[ElTerribleMorales]

Duran was how old when he beat Barkley?

37 i think.

well that'd be close enough don't you think? lol especially when it was 5 divisions above from where he started

[JazMerkin]

Duran was how old when he beat Barkley?

37 i think.

well that'd be close enough don't you think? lol especially when it was 5 divisions above from where he started

Yeah, why not

We might as well include 37 year olds in a thread about great 40+ fighter. He's a perfect example of a guy who should've known to quit in his 30s, if not after the SRL defeat, then after he got KO'd by Pat Lawlor.

I also wouldn't count Tarver & Johnson, as both have yet to do anything whilst actually being IN their 40s.

I actually hold Hopkins acheivements since turning 40 on a similar level to Moore's, I think the biggest difference is we have clearer idea of how he's faded since his prime at the start of the decade (anyone who says this is prime Hopkins is an idiot)

[ElTerribleMorales]

37 i think.

well that'd be close enough don't you think? lol especially when it was 5 divisions above from where he started

Yeah, why not

We might as well include 37 year olds in a thread about great 40+ fighter. He's a perfect example of a guy who should've known to quit in his 30s, if not after the SRL defeat, then after he got KO'd by Pat Lawlor.

I also wouldn't count Tarver & Johnson, as both have yet to do anything whilst actually being IN their 40s.

I actually hold Hopkins acheivements since turning 40 on a similar level to Moore's, I think the biggest difference is we have clearer idea of how he's faded since his prime at the start of the decade (anyone who says this is prime Hopkins is an idiot)

yea cause winning a world title at a weight, 5 divisions above your natural weight proves you were shot at 30, especially by doing it against the guy who had just knocked out Thomas Hearns in 3 rounds in his previous time out.

IMO though Hopkins holds the torch as the best fighter in his 40's just seeing how he continues to take on the best and W L or D he never is completely outclassed

either

[JazMerkin]

well that'd be close enough don't you think? lol especially when it was 5 divisions above from where he started

Yeah, why not

We might as well include 37 year olds in a thread about great 40+ fighter. He's a perfect example of a guy who should've known to quit in his 30s, if not after the SRL defeat, then after he got KO'd by Pat Lawlor.

I also wouldn't count Tarver & Johnson, as both have yet to do anything whilst actually being IN their 40s.

I actually hold Hopkins acheivements since turning 40 on a similar level to Moore's, I think the biggest difference is we have clearer idea of how he's faded since his prime at the start of the decade (anyone who says this is prime Hopkins is an idiot)

yea cause winning a world title at a weight, 5 divisions above your natural weight proves you were shot at 30, especially by doing it against the guy who had just knocked out Thomas Hearns in 3 rounds in his previous time out.

IMO though Hopkins holds the torch as the best fighter in his 40's just seeing how he continues to take on the best and W L or D he never is completely outclassed

either

LMAO, I would've thought mentioning Lawlor would've made you realize that I meant the 3rd fight. If you think getting beaten by an average MW in Lawlor wasn't the hint for him to retire than you're blinded by Duran-love. The Barkley fight was great, but it was not a dominant win, I've watched that fight & at different times thought both guys won it. Duran did nothing of any note post-Barkley other than fight some bums & lose to Vinny Paz (also 5 divisions above where he started) which was a travesty as he would've destroyed that fool in his day.

[ICB]

Yeah, why not

We might as well include 37 year olds in a thread about great 40+ fighter. He's a perfect example of a guy who should've known to quit in his 30s, if not after the SRL defeat, then after he got KO'd by Pat Lawlor.

I also wouldn't count Tarver & Johnson, as both have yet to do anything whilst actually being IN their 40s.

I actually hold Hopkins acheivements since turning 40 on a similar level to Moore's, I think the biggest difference is we have clearer idea of how he's faded since his prime at the start of the decade (anyone who says this is prime Hopkins is an idiot)

yea cause winning a world title at a weight, 5 divisions above your natural weight proves you were shot at 30, especially by doing it against the guy who had just knocked out Thomas Hearns in 3 rounds in his previous time out.

IMO though Hopkins holds the torch as the best fighter in his 40's just seeing how he continues to take on the best and W L or D he never is completely outclassed

either

LMAO, I would've thought mentioning Lawlor would've made you realize that I meant the 3rd fight. If you think getting KO'd by an average MW in Lawlor wasn't the hint for him to retire than you're blinded by Duran-love. The Barkley fight was great, but it was not a dominant win, I've watched that fight & at different times thought both guys won it. Duran did nothing of any note post-Barkley other than fight some bums & lose to Vinny Paz (also 5 divisions above where he started) which was a travesty as he would've destroyed that fool in his day.

I thought he couldn't continue against Pat Lawlor, because of a shoulder injury ? by the way i also thought Iran Barkley won, but because of the cirumstances surronding that fight size wise and age wise, i have no problem with Roberto Duran winning.

[JazMerkin]

yea cause winning a world title at a weight, 5 divisions above your natural weight proves you were shot at 30, especially by doing it against the guy who had just knocked out Thomas Hearns in 3 rounds in his previous time out.

IMO though Hopkins holds the torch as the best fighter in his 40's just seeing how he continues to take on the best and W L or D he never is completely outclassed

either

LMAO, I would've thought mentioning Lawlor would've made you realize that I meant the 3rd fight. If you think getting KO'd by an average MW in Lawlor wasn't the hint for him to retire than you're blinded by Duran-love. The Barkley fight was great, but it was not a dominant win, I've watched that fight & at different times thought both guys won it. Duran did nothing of any note post-Barkley other than fight some bums & lose to Vinny Paz (also 5 divisions above where he started) which was a travesty as he would've destroyed that fool in his day.

I thought he couldn't continue against Pat Lawlor, because of a shoulder injury ? by the way i also thought Iran Barkley won, but because of the cirumstances surronding that fight size wise and age wise, i have no problem with Roberto Duran winning.

You know what, I'll admit you might be right, I remember a chubby looking Duran getting KO'd by somebody not of his level, but it might have been someone else. I just remember he lost to Lawlor after SRL & put 2+2 together. Any ideas who it was?

[JonnyFolds]

Duran never really had a big win past 40, although he did weed out a lot of fighters for the middle weight division.

I don't remember the Lawlor fight and I am a pretty big Duran fan. He did get outboxed by Kirkland Liang, which was a little embarrassing. But he had some more than just redeeming moments after his campaign below WW.

Duran had the Davey Moore fight after SRL 2, he beat Barkley, and he almost beat Hagler in case any of you forgot. I (and the judges) had him ahead after 12 rounds... unfortunately they had to fight 15 rounds and with the 13th round a swing round, plus Duran losing the last 2 rounds clearly from no fuel left in the tank. It was really a razor thin decision and a tactical fight. Reminded me of JMMarquez and Barrera in a lot of ways. Two very seasoned/game fighters in the twilight of their careers dishing out every different punch and trick in the book!

Check that fight out if you ever get a chance.

[Taeth]

Bernard Hopkins IMO is by far the best over 40 fighter.