Why did Marciano Choose to defend against Charles than Valdez ?

Why do people care so much how who went to the better college and who has the higher IQ? I always felt the only thing that matters is how much money do you make, can you support your family comfortably, and are you happy.

 

Janitor,

Based on reading this...you might be inclined to think Marciano ducked Moore by his manager saying "We will fight Nino Valdes". It seems Moore was considered the bigger threat than Valdes

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...1crAAAAIBAJ&sjid=u5wFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6596,6330164

 

I couldn't care less, I am just returning fire with the fool who instigated this line of tripe , probably because he can't make a point without making a total ass of himself. I didn't take a detour , start bad mouthing Jack Johnson and talking about wife beating and posters IQ's.[WTF have they to do with this thread? ] . Silly bollocks Mendozy did.

BTW He once sent me a PM about you. I don't think you would be thrilled by his opinion of you.I still have it and if he continues with his crap on this thread, I might post it.

 

Indeed.

I get the idea that after Moore beat Valdez, his attitude was “Valdez just lost to the light heavyweight champion, he obviously wasn’t all that, there is nobody left for me to fight”.

It is as if he was preparing to fight Valdez, and once Valdez was eliminated he decided to retire, and was only persuaded to come back for one last fight against Moore by sustained pressure from Moore’s camp.

 

I love the rough stuff,Duran was always one of my favorites,Ali pulled the neck Holmes used his thumbs, Fritzie Zivic was the master, the best is when the ref does not see it, its an art

 

The bottom line is Archie was not rated as a heavyweight but the world knew he deserved a title fight before Valdez and had Marciano fought Valdes the same guys putting up a suckers holla would be saying Marciano ducked the better man

 

He is and was but will never admit he was wrong, very agenda orientated

 

Mendoza and I have had a past history together. I've said some things about him too. I'm over it. I'm sure he is too. If you want to PM me what he said, that's fine.

 

This thread needs to be pinned.

Great stuff.


I did 12 years at Oxford and have a 188 IQ.

 

Nice post, never heard the term a sucker's holla before, I like it. I think some posters have been fair assessing the situation of the time and the rightful challengers to Rocky, while others clearly have a pre-determined agenda.

My take is Valdes was not a duck by Rocky, Weill may have been cautious to put Marciano in with Valdes, however had Valdes defeated Moore he would of been the challenger. He lost. I also believe had they fought Rocky would have fared really well and pounded out a late stoppage in a one sided fight.

Marciano fought three fighters shop worn or not all better than Valdes. And only in retrospect as heavies have become bigger has it become an issue to speculate how Marciano would have fared and a sucker's holla to a few who want to diminish his legacy.

 

Duran is one of my favourites too,along with Ali and Holmes.Zivic was one of the dirtiest fighters ever


Hopkins is adept at getting away with stuff on the ref's blind side.
Galento was horrendous.Pedroza[ low punches,] Norris,[ hitting when down ,]Fulllmer[butting] ,Saddler [everything,]Holyfield[ butting ]Tyson etc.
As I said its not improvisation,it's infringing the rules, some like pulling down are relatively innocuous, Wlad is the current king of it.
Some like thumbing are extremely dangerous.

 

H E and I have had a couple of rows but over all he's a good poster imo.

He has stated he thinks Marciano kos Valdes,I don't know what more he could do to meet those who disagree with his thread halfway?

I don't think you are too quick to admit you are wrong Bummy.

 

S , in rebutting Mendoza's rubbish,all I've done is reply to a moron .
Come to think of it engaging with a moron doesn't reflect very well on my intelligence.

BTW I've repeatedly asked for such deathless phrases as" plough hands "and ,"child birthing hips" to be pinned but had no luck so far.

 

You can get a good feel of things by reading books of the period that include interviews and " off the cuff remarks".

I would agree record books are an aid but not the definitve answer.

 

Is it desperate to claim that Ken Norton deserved the decision against Ali in their third fight? All three judges gave Ali 8 rounds in that fight (just like Archie got eight rounds against Valdes by the sole judge and two reporters.)

The ref in Ali-Norton III scored it for Ali 8-6-1. I guess that puts that whole controversy to bed. No one ever has to debate whether Ali-Norton III was accurately scored ever again.

By the way, here is the United Press article in full on the Moore-Valdes fight. The last paragraph seems to get cut off a lot when people post it.

The United Press writer definitely sided with Moore. But look at the last paragraph. Clearly, everyone didn't agree, as fans started throwing their seat cushions into the ring in anger after the verdict was read.

It was such an excellent bout that many of the fans<BR>
thought Valdes had won. Some of them began throwing<BR>
cushions into the ring. But announcer Al Schenk, well<BR>
known New York comedian, ordered the throwing<BR>
stopped "lest you injure someone seriously." And there<BR>
was no more cushion-tossing.


Can you recall any other Archie Moore fight where fans were so pissed Moore got the decision that they threw parts of their seats into the ring in disgust?

No doubt that if there were online message boards back in 1955, and the fight had been televised, there wouldn't be all this nonsense about "the decision was fair, move on."

Any fight that has ever gone 15 rounds in the history of this sport, and the winner has "only" earned 8 rounds on the official card, has been controversial ... because you only need to disagree on one round to give it to the other guy.

Why didn't they have three judges score such an important fight? Why one judge - the ref? They weren't fighting in England.

When fans start throwing crap in the ring afterward because they thought it was a bad decision, maybe the ref and the reporters getting their rooms comped at the Vegas hotels were seeing things the fans weren't.

<BR>
ARCHIE MOORE NEARS HEAVY TITLE SHOT<BR>
<BR>
(United Press, Tuesday, May 3, 1955)<BR>
<BR>
LAS VEGAS, Nev. -- Light heavyweight champion<BR>
Archie Moore established himself as the top contender<BR>
for the world heavyweight crown Monday night by<BR>
battering big Nino Valdes of Cuba half blind to win a 15-<BR>
round decision.<BR>
<BR>
Referee James Braddock, former heavyweight<BR>
champion and sole judge of the bout, favored 38-year-<BR>
old Moore on rounds, 8-5-2.<BR>
<BR>
It was an excellent fight in which Moore's superior<BR>
speed and snap in his punches beat the tall Cuban,<BR>
who had been generally rated top contender for the<BR>
heavy title.<BR>
<BR>
The bout was staged before a crowd of 10,800 in<BR>
Cashman Field as the sun was setting. A gate of<BR>
$102,678 was registered. The twilight fight was the<BR>
most important boxing contest ever held in Las Vegas.<BR>
<BR>
Although Moore weighed 196 1/2 pounds, the heaviest<BR>
of his career, he appeared much faster than 30-year-old<BR>
Valdes, who is somewhat awkward. Valdes packed 209<BR>
1/4 pounds on his six-foot-three frame.<BR>
<BR>
There were no knockdowns in this battle between two<BR>
good punchers, but the effects of their blows resulted in<BR>
Valdes' left eye being swollen tightly shut in the 13th<BR>
round.<BR>
<BR>
Moore was bleeding from the nose and lower lip at the<BR>
finish and his left eye was swollen -- but he could see<BR>
very well.<BR>
<BR>
In the dressing room, Moore said, "Valdes died in the<BR>
last three rounds."<BR>
<BR>
Because of his victory over the number-one heavy<BR>
contender, Moore will demand a heavy title shot at the<BR>
winner of the Rocky Marciano-Don ****ell<BR>
championship bout at San Francisco on May 16.<BR>
<BR>
"If I can't get that shot, I'll defend my own title against<BR>
Bobo Olson," he said. Despite his 196 1/2 pounds, the<BR>
mustachioed battler said he was sure he could pare<BR>
down to the 175-pound limit for a defense.<BR>
<BR>
Archie and big Nino engaged in a very rough brawl, and<BR>
each dropped several low blows during the slugging.<BR>
Accordingly, Referee Braddock penalized each one<BR>
round. He took the fifth from Moore and the 11th from<BR>
Valdes on fouls.<BR>
<BR>
It was such an excellent bout that many of the fans<BR>
thought Valdes had won. Some of them began throwing<BR>
cushions into the ring. But announcer Al Schenk, well<BR>
known New York comedian, ordered the throwing<BR>
stopped "lest you injure someone seriously." And there<BR>
was no more cushion-tossing.<BR>


We are all extremely hyper-critical of scoring and the way fights are judged today. We are because we can watch them, rewind them, zoom in, watch them again, and debate them on boards.

So I've always found it odd that the same people who argue a lot about modern scoring often just blindly accept the scoring from fights years ago - as if the scoring today is routinely controversial ... but the scoring years ago was 100 percent accurate.

To me, claiming the scoring back then was 100 percent accurate is "desperate" ... it's not desperate to question scoring when things still look fishy even 60 years later.

I also agree this thread should be pinned. It was a fun debate. Lots of good information on both sides.

Whoever I argued with on this board, I didn't take anything personally. I hope you didn't either.

Happy Fourth of July!

PEACE!