Why did Marciano Choose to defend against Charles than Valdez ?

"dictates the fight results"

Everyone is supposed to genuflect to your analysis of styles? Yours isn't the only opinion in the world. If you disagree with someone, just state why.

"one large, hard hitting, young"

He fought large and hard hitting. Young as well is a fair point, but some of us just don't see it as decisive.

I really don't want to get into this cross-generational argument which you seem to be obsessed with. Doesn't interest me. But I could point that it was the small men who tripped up a lot of fellows who handled the big guys. Speed and mobility can be just as lethal as size.

And Valdes is hardly a good example to prove that size is decisive off his overall record against small men.

 

Just on my opinion of styles. There are experts out there who agree with me. Here is one post from 3-20-2010 thread on the film of Archie Moore-Nino Valdes and his reaction--

"Valdez sure fought small . . . if he fought that style v. s. Marciano I can not see it going long . . . Rocky would have destroyed him . . ."

"Now that I see Valdez highlight footage the biggest loss we have from not having a Marciano/Valdez match up is a great Marciano highlight reel KO . . ."

This poster was named He Grant. I bumped the thread so everyone can watch the fight film.

I was not nearly as strong in my opinion as that.

*This probably shows somewhat the limitation of "style" opinions whether mine or anyone else's. Folks can be on both sides at different times.

 

Bottom line seems to be something like this--

Everybody thinks Moore was the most qualified challenger.

Everybody thinks Valdes was more qualified than Don C and should have gotten the 1955 shot.

Most think LaStarza and Charles should have gotten shots when they did.

 

True. While Valdez was a legitimate contender, you have guys in every single era for whom the stars don't quite line up. Timing was the biggest factor that hurt Nino Valdez along with his inability to shine when it counted most.

 

Dubblechin,

Marciano is an ATG hall of fame heavyweight at his peak. Do you think Nino Valdes was that good at his best?

1. Charles had Nino Valdes hurt in the 2nd round of their fight. Clearly, that's trouble.

2. Nino did not beat Charles any easier than Marciano did. Both won clear unanimous decisions. Marciano also knocked Charles out, something Valdes didn't do.

3. Charles showed up an "out of shape" 192lb vs the unranked Cuban. Charles showed up a much leaner and in better shape 185lb vs Marciano for the title. Think Charles trained harder for Marciano or Valdes?

4. Don ****ell did not give Marciano a tough night. Marciano won 8 of the first 9 rounds on 3 judges scorecards, and knocked ****ell down 4 times. Yet, you classify that as a tough night?

5. This is speculation, but I believe Valdes fought a worse version of ****ell than the one who challenged Marciano for the title. ****ell stated in an interview after his retirement that he had been physically ruined by Marciano in their title fight, and could no longer fight at a top level again.

No one else that night thought Valdes beat Moore. Every source I have read on that fight had Moore winning a close but clear decision. Moore won the last 3 rounds, which won him the fight. Moore closed Valdes eye completely shut. Funny, you talk about Valdes sharing the same ring with Marciano. If valdes got broken down and tired in the last 3 rounds vs a 38 year old light-heavwyeight, how is Valdes going to manage to last in the championship rounds with a 30 year old 47-0 ATG heavyweight champion who had relentless stamina and huge punching power?


I challenge you to give me one source that had Valdes winning on their unofficial scorecard?

Here is two different news read for Moore-Valdes II 1955

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...ttUjAAAAIBAJ&sjid=aOIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6831,491311
http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...t7kzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2u4HAAAAIBAJ&pg=6467,244337

Yes. Charles of June 1954 beats Archie Moore. Charles gave Marciano a much tougher fight than Archie did.

How is the associated press bias against Valdes? They scored the fight for Moore, almost an identical card to Braddocks. Seems to me Braddock turned in a fine, fair scorecard.

Valdes went 0-2 against Archie Moore. Marciano absolutely destroyed Moore. Knocked Moore down 4 times, and won most of the rounds before knocking him out in 9. Valdes couldn't floor Archie Moore one time in 20 rounds.

Joe Louis possessed Valdes size at 6'2 214lb. His reach 76", was only 2" shorter than Valdes 78". Louis possessed skill that Valdes never had. Louis power was still comparable to Valdes, even at 37. Louis also knocked Nino Valdes out in 1 round when they fought in 1950.

None of Valdes victims possessed the punching power, durability, stamina, strength, and workrate that a prime Rocky Marciano possessed. Valdes would be in over his head vs Marciano.

Styles do make fights. Styles dictates that Valdes had trouble with smaller fighters(Mcbride, Moore, Satterfield, Johnson), had trouble with stamina(gassed in most of his fights on film), could not sustain a good enough workrate, had questionable heart, did not possess devastating punching power, did not have the best chin, and had very sloppy balance. The moore fight in 1955 shows Valdes is not a 15 round fighter. While Marciano was throwing 105 power punches in round 15 vs Charles, Valdes was getting the **** kicked out of him by a 38 year old light heavyweight while gasping for air because hes never been 15 rounds before.


Styles dictate Marciano had one of the best right hand punches ever, had one punch knockout power in either hand, was one of the greatest volume punchers who ever lived, had great finishing ability, was very strong, he had a great chin, his balance was spectacular and he had amazing leverage, he was very unorthdox and had solid upperbody movement in his crouch, his heart was one of the biggest in ring history.


So who do you think has the advantage here?

Based on what? Beating an overconfident, out of shape Ezzard Charles..then refusing to rematch a better prepared Charles? Or was it his knockouts over C level ham n eggers like Heinz Neuhas, or the crude, sloppy featherfisted amateur Tommy Jackson?

Valdes on his hottest day couldn't match Marciano on his worst day. Different levels. One was great, the other was not.

 

HeGrant getting exposed. I love it.

 

Dubble Chin,

Marciano was ahead on all 3 judges scorecards when he knocked Joe Louis out cold, so let's lighten up on the exaggerations. Furthermore, where is your evidence that Valdes had a better jab than Joe Louis? Louis also had much better boxing skills than Valdes.

I doubt it was Joe Louis jab that knocked out Nino Valdes in 1 round in 1950.

Louis looks like he still had some power left in his punches here in 1950

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/video/news-footage/mr_00025063

Valdes may have punched with two hands, but at least Louis knew how to box. Nino didn't.

Nino was only 1" taller than Joe Louis(6'3 vs 6'2) and had just a 2" reach advantage(79" vs 77") on Louis. Louis weighed the same as Valdes(215lb). Do you really think a 1" height advantage and 2" reach advantage is that significant? Rocky had an all time great overhand right hand thrown from the crouch that will hit Valdes square on the button when he slips that jab(Like satterfield did to Valdes all night)

"Elderly" Louis knocked out Nino Valdes in 1 round in 1950. Elderly Louis was still a class above any version of Valdes. Valdes did not have the punching skills to knock out Louis, and would be outboxed by Louis the whole fight and lose by decision to the more skilled "elderly" veteran.



In your opinion who wins between a 1951 joe Louis and niño valdes?

 

DubbleChin,

Here is an article of Moore-Valdes II stating "Everyone at ringside thought Moore won. Some thought it was much closer."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...JooAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KNcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2255,2312451


Stop calling this victory "controversial"


http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...p80AAAAIBAJ&sjid=pnIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6134,2278731

Here is an article after Valdes-Parker fight in 1954. Valdes was so umimpressive NYSC chairmen of boxing returned Valdes $ 5000 deposit check for Marciano stating "Off last nights fight, we can't consider Valdes a worthy challenger for Marciano."


DubbleChin,


Here is an article in Oct of 1954 quoting Al Weill as saying " I am short of opponents. I hope nothing happens to ****ell and Valdes. Marciano will fight both ****ell and Valdes."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...uMiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7MwFAAAAIBAJ&pg=2538,2386174

here is an article Weill stating "Rocky never ducked anyone and both Valdes and Moore will get there shot. He'll flatten both of em in time".

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...IdjAAAAIBAJ&sjid=y3kNAAAAIBAJ&pg=7152,3747264

 

Well, he didn't exactly say they'll get their shot. He said they would "when we're ready."

And what did he do after he said that?

He didn't sign to fight Valdes and then Moore.

He had Marciano fight Don ****ell and he demanded Moore and Valdes fight each other, and Rocky would only fight the winner.

Weill was a liar.

 

You guys keep asking questions ... so I'm going to ask a few of you.

When did Marciano's camp make any effort to defend against the number-one contender (and logical/mandatory) Nino Valdes in late 1954/early 1955?

Where are the articles that say they made an offer to Valdes, and he turned it down in late 1954/1955?

Where are the articles saying Weill was trying to make that fight in late 1954/1955, but all the ratings bodies and the boxing organizations kept blocking it?

Because the simple fact is if Marciano had signed to fight Nino Valdes (his #1 contender and the fellow EVERYONE recognized as the person due a title fight next) and Archie Moore (the light heavy champ) in 1955, NO ONE would be saying he ducked Don ****ell.